Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/13/2015 - COMMUNITY RECYCLING ORDINANCEDATE: STAFF: October 13, 2015 Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Planner Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Community Recycling Ordinance. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to consider options to update and potentially expand Fort Collins’ Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) ordinance into a Community Recycling Ordinance, in support of the Road to Zero Waste and Climate Action Plan goals. Options include updating the price differential between trash can sizes under the current PAYT ordinance for single-family homes, and expanding recycling to all multi-family and commercial locations in Fort Collins. In two years, the options under consideration are bundling organics collection (food scraps, yard trimmings, etc.) into the single-family service rates, and requiring composting of food scraps from grocers and large restaurants. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council have direction regarding options and timeline for a. Updating the price differential for trash at single-family homes? b. Recycling at multi-family complexes and businesses? c. Organics collection options for single-family homes and grocers / large restaurants? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In 1995, Fort Collins City Council passed a Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) ordinance, which governs how trash and recycling service are provided by the private sector to residents of single-family homes in Fort Collins. This type of ordinance has since become an EPA-recognized best practice for communities to increase recycling, and over 9,000 communities have adopted PAYT ordinances. Fort Collins’ PAYT ordinance has been an effective tool to incentivize and grow recycling and waste diversion. In 2013, City staff conducted a thorough public outreach and planning project, which resulted in a Road to Zero Waste plan. This plan outlined implementation steps to meet the goals City Council adopted in December 2013 of recycling or composting 75% of the community’s materials by 2020, 90% by 2025, and aiming for a goal of zero waste by 2030. Zero Waste is much like a zero injury goal, and is a commitment to continuous improvement regarding waste disposal. One of the key implementation steps in the Road to Zero Waste plan was an update and expansion of Fort Collins PAYT ordinance. The Community Recycling Ordinance is that project, and includes an update to the existing ordinance, as well as a consideration of additional ways the ordinance can help achieve Fort Collins’ waste reduction goals. Over the past five months, staff worked with a consultant to evaluate best practices and develop recommendations, worked with a stakeholder advisory group for ongoing feedback, and conducted extensive public outreach. The options and recommendations below reflect the research and feedback received. Attachment 1 provides a one-page summary of the options under consideration. October 13, 2015 Page 2 Existing Ordinance The existing PAYT ordinance applies only to single-family homes. It bundles together trash and recycling service and cost, and requires that a resident’s trash bill is based on the volume of recycling to which they subscribe. It requires a 100% price difference between sizes of trash cans and disallows any additional fees on a resident’s trash bill. For example, if the smallest trash cart (32 gallons) were $15 / month, the medium cart (64 gallons) would be $30/month, and the largest (96 gallons) $45 / month. These are round numbers meant for illustration – the haulers set their own rates and the numbers listed here aren’t meant to represent the actual rate charged by local haulers. Potential Updates to Existing Ordinance (For Single-Family Home Residents) Options 1a and 1b: Changes to the price difference between trash cart sizes Over time, the PAYT ordinance has been updated to provide further refinement or to adapt to changes in the local markets. Recently, changes in the contract at the Larimer County Recycling Center have resulted in charges to haulers when delivering recyclables (for which they were paid in the past). Fort Collins is also a community that is recycling more and more material, and may potentially add compost collection services in the future. Given the 20 year history of Fort Collins and other communities’ PAYT ordinances and the over 9,000 communities that have adopted PAYT ordinances, there has been substantial research into the ideal PAYT ordinance. Research from SERA, a recycling and trash economics consultancy, indicates the ideal price difference between trash cart sizes to motivate waste reduction and recycling is 80%. For example, if a small trash cart were $15, a medium would be $27, and a large $39. According to the same research, the minimal incline rate to still provide motivation is 50%, which would result in example trash rates of $15, $22.50, and $30. Due to the charges for recycling, the haulers are quite likely to raise rates for customers in 2016. A decreased price difference between trash cart sizes would mean that residents who subscribe to the medium or large size trash cans wouldn’t see as significant an increase in their rates. The decreased incline would also help keep prices more affordable for larger trash subscribers if Council chose to bundle in organics collection service in the future. In order to best maintain the excellent recycling habits already established by Fort Collins residents while minimizing the impact of rate increases on 64- and 96-gallon customers, staff is recommending an 80% price difference between trash cart sizes. From conversations with trash haulers in Fort Collins, staff understands their preference to be a 50% price difference between trash cart sizes, which is the minimal amount found to be effective at encouraging recycling in a Pay-As-You-Throw system, but does not result in as much diversion as an 80% price difference. Input from the public via the online questionnaire during this project showed a strong preference for keeping recycling and trash services bundled together and to not provide any disincentive for recycling, but hasn’t distinguished between the 50% or 80% incline. Attachment 5 illustrates the impact of price differences between trash cart sizes on example prices for service. City-provided education to customers The current ordinance requires haulers to send educational materials to their customers at least one time per year. In order to provide more consistency for residents no matter which hauler they choose, and to utilize the educational resources at the City, an update to the existing ordinance is being offered for the City to provide an educational piece that would be included in haulers’ bills once a year. This piece could also include the hauler’s logo on the material going to their customers. Potential expansion of PAYT ordinance to multi-family housing Roughly half of Fort Collins residents live in multi-family housing. Multi-family housing developments have to subscribe separately to recycling and pay separately for the service. Local haulers report that 68% of their multi- family customers have recycling service. Achieving recycling for residents of the 32% of multi-family housing that don’t have recycling service could be accomplished by bundling recycling in with trash service, or by requiring recycling service to be provided. October 13, 2015 Page 3 City staff and consultants have evaluated these two options:  Bundle with trash service an amount of recycling equivalent to 25-50% of the volume of the total service, similar to the Pay-As-You-Throw system for single-family homes  Require recycling service be provided to all multi-family and commercial customers, as separate charge on their bills, and at a service level the hauler and customer agree upon. Option 2a: Bundling 25-50% of service volume in recycling While a specific ratio of recycling to trash service is not included in the single-family home service due to the relatively consistent amount of recycling and trash generated at a single-family home, establishing a ratio is important for multi-family and commercial since they generate significantly varying amounts of material per location. For example, if a location subscribed to 4 cubic yards of trash service, this option could bundle in 2 cubic yards of recycling service (resulting in 4 cubic yards of trash and 2 cubic yards of recycling). Bundling in service ensures that all customers receive recycling service, and provides a level generally found to be adequate for multi-family complexes (according to national waste sort studies and service levels seen at local apartment complexes). If a location has more recycling than is bundled in, they can purchase additional recycling service from their hauler. If a location is unable to recycle due to space restrictions, financial hardship, or other reason, the City would have a system to apply for exemption from the bundling, which, if approved, would be valid for 24 months, allowing the location to plan for future recycling implementation. Option 2b: Requiring recycling service Requiring recycling service be provided could have a minimal impact on trash bills, depending on the amount agreed upon by the hauler and the customer, but could also result in apartment complexes being significantly underserved for recycling. The town of Vail implemented this system in 2014, and found that many locations subscribed to minimal recycling service. If this option is implemented in Fort Collins, City staff would periodically evaluate the effectiveness of the program. If it were found to be ineffective, and in a few years the City then decided bundle recycling service or require a certain level of recycling, the trash haulers would then have to undergo the expense of working with customers to realign service levels, delivering new containers and picking up old containers. A benefit of bundling in an adequate amount of recycling initially is that the haulers only have to undertake the cost of changing service for their customers that aren’t recycling once. Additional information regarding multi-family recycling If Council opts to adopt either of these options, City staff would expect to enhance and widely offer the services of WRAP (the City’s Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program) to assist new recyclers with educational materials, technical assistance, recycling signage etc. Staff would leverage the support of interns and volunteers and assess whether additional staff support should be requested in the next BFO cycle. City staff is sensitive to the affordability of housing in Fort Collins and this project’s impact to housing costs. City staff confirmed that all subsidized affordable housing complexes in Fort Collins already have recycling, so would be unlikely to have cost impacts from this project. The cost impact of starting recycling for the 32% of apartments that don’t currently have it will be dependent on whether the property manager “right-sizes” their trash service. It is important to note that the cost impact of either bundling recycling service or requiring recycling service is highly dependent on whether the customer “right-sizes” their trash bin. Since the same volume of material is being disposed of, just in two bins rather than one, most customers can decrease the size or service frequency of their trash bin when they start recycling. If customers don’t right-size and are instead paying for excess trash capacity, the cost impact for them is likely to be more significant. October 13, 2015 Page 4 Example of service levels with and without right-sizing recycling Current trash-only service Recycling plus trash, NO right-sizing Recycling plus trash, WITH right-sizing (using 50% of service volume referenced in option 2a) Cubic yards (cy) of service 4 cy of trash service 4 cy of trash service, 2 cy of recycling service 2 cy of recycling service, 2 cy of trash service Overall volume of service provided 4 cy total 6 cy total 4 cy total Potential expansion of PAYT ordinance to commercial sector According to data from local haulers, 48% of businesses in Fort Collins currently recycle. In order for Fort Collins to meet its adopted recycling and composting goals, participation from the commercial sector is crucial. City staff and consultants evaluated many options for including the commercial sector, and determined the same options described above for multi-family housing would service the commercial sector well, with the same considerations as listed above. One benefit of having a uniform recycling system across the commercial sector is that it provides a level playing field – all businesses in Fort Collins will be participating in recycling. It is also important to note this would be unlikely to create cost increases for the 48% of businesses that already recycle, and could provide cost savings due to route efficiencies when haulers have more customer density. Additionally, haulers have indicated an 18-month roll-out period would be required for either of the above programs for the multi-family and commercial sectors, to allow time to contact customers, order and deliver necessary bins, get customers set up etc. This timing is reflected in the staff recommendations. Potential Organics Collection Options Over 50% of the material currently being landfilled by the Fort Collins community could be diverted from the landfill for composting. Staff is recommending a phased-in implementation of composting service through the following three options. Option 3: Requiring every hauler to offer optional curbside yard trimmings collection Currently, one of the three haulers offers seasonal curbside collection of yard trimmings for residents, and another is piloting it in a neighborhood. This provision would require that each hauler offer this service as an option for their customers, for which a fee would be charged. The yard trimmings would not be allowed to be landfilled, but must be delivered for composting or mulching. Option 4: Starting 2017 or 2018, bundling in organics collection (including yard trimmings & food scraps) Year-round collection of food scraps, yard trimmings, and food-soiled paper (such as paper towels and paper plates) would make a substantial decrease to the amount of material landfilled by Fort Collins residents. Weekly collection of these materials could be bundled in with residential trash and recycling service. This approach has been adopted by several communities in Colorado, including Louisville, Lafayette, and Boulder. There has been strong interest from Fort Collins residents during public outreach in having more options for organics collection. Although implementation isn’t expected until 2017 or 2018, including this in the ordinance now, with a set start date, allows haulers to plan for needed infrastructure and be ready to roll out the service. Such advance notice of programs worked well in Austin to allow the private sector the security of knowing the service will need to be provided, and giving them time to prepare for it. October 13, 2015 Page 5 Option 5: Requiring food scraps subscription from grocers and large restaurants A significant amount of food scraps and food-soiled paper is disposed of by grocers and large restaurants. For these specific types of businesses, composting can have a significant impact, as generally 60-75% of their waste is compostable food scraps and food-soiled paper. Staff has confirmed that the majority of grocery stores in Fort Collins currently compost or plan to start in the next 6 months. Some large restaurants such as The Rio Grande also compost. Service costs for compost collection have been at a premium in Fort Collins due to the prior long hauling distance to composting locations (prior to 2014, the closest composter was in Commerce City), and low customer density. As a result, few restaurants currently compost. Rates for compost collection service would be expected to become more affordable as haulers acquire more customers and more efficiencies of route density, as well as taking advantage of the shorter haul distance to Eaton. Haulers have indicated they would be able to provide this service to customers after rolling out the additional recycling to commercial and multi-family customers, likely starting in 24 months. Similar to organics service for the single-family sector, including the start date for the service now allows haulers and processing facilities to plan for and adequately provide this service, rather than await future Council action to be certain of a start date for service. Other considerations and information regarding food scrap composting and waste-to-energy In the last year, food scrap composting has become a more feasible option for Fort Collins, due to two food scrap composting options coming on line.  A1 Organics in Eaton, a long-time yard trimmings composter, received their permit to accept food scraps last year.  The largest bio-digester in North America, the Heartland Bio-digester, has recently opened in Kersey (near Greeley). The Heartland Bio-digester not only composts food waste via a wet anaerobic digestion process, but also generates, captures, and processes methane – an excellent waste-to-energy option. This natural gas is pumped directly into the pipelines from the facility. One concern that is often raised about composting food scraps is that of potentially increased pests. It is important to keep in mind the material that would be put in a bin for composting is likely already being put out in a trash bin – it would simply be placed in a different bin. The same measures that locations currently undertake to prevent pests should be suitable for compost collection bins as well. In addition, compost bins are typically rinsed out by service providers when they are emptied (with the rinse water being emptied into the collection vehicle). Trash bins are not rinsed when serviced. While options are being researched in the Community Recycling Ordinance project to provide organics collection to the single-family and commercial sectors, there are additional complicating factors for the multi-family sector, so organics collection for multi-family complexes is not being considered in this project. It would certainly be an option for the haulers to extend organics collection service to complexes that want to participate, and may make sense to provide organics collection service to all multi-family housing in the future. Longer term options One of the tools that were discussed extensively in this project is that of banning the landfill disposal of curbside recyclable materials and/or yard trimmings and food scraps (organics). These are effective tools, but often are considered after easy, widely-available service is already provided for collecting these materials. The 2013-adopted disposal ban for cardboard has been an effective tool, but simply expanding it is not anticipated to have a significant impact unless services to collect recyclables or compostables are implemented City-wide. A stand-alone disposal ban has likely already had its beneficial impact on diversion in the community, and additional tools are estimated to be needed prior to additional effectiveness of disposal bans. However, once services are in place, implementing disposal bans may be useful to consider as an effective reinforcement for the October 13, 2015 Page 6 use of those services. Staff is not recommending adoption of future-dated bans at this time, but is providing this information as context for understanding potential next steps. Public Engagement Extensive public engagement was conducted throughout the development of the Community Recycling Ordinance.  Staff provided information online, including an online questionnaire (received nearly 250 responses), opportunity to receive email updates on the project (over 500 people subscribed), a 4-minute video overview of the project, and project documents. o Feedback from the open-ended questions in the online questionnaire centered around support for maintaining the bundled recycling / trash service for single-family homes; ensuring that incentives to recycle were maintained; interest in organics collection from single-family homes; and interest in recycling at apartment complexes and businesses. A summary of responses is included in Attachment 8.  Presentations were given to 19 groups (full listing included in the Public Engagement Summary in Attachment 6), including business, multi-family, university, environmental and civic groups, as well as City boards and commissions.  Four public meetings were held at locations spread throughout town with attendees from multiple sectors of the community. Details are in the Public Engagement Summary attachment.  Staff shared information about the project at events including the CSU Lagoon Concert series, Larimer County Farmers’ Market, and Sustainable Living Fair. An advisory group engaged closely in the project development. Members are listed in the Public Engagement Summary (Attachment 6). The advisory group’s perspectives and thoughtful input were beneficial to the project development. As a whole, the group vacillated between bold ideas and innovative initiatives to concern for the basics of making sure residents can put materials at the curb and have them hauled away. The group discussed the ideas put forth in the Community Recycling Ordinance at length. Outstanding areas of concern regarding business and multi-family options include potential cost increases’ impact on housing affordability, space restrictions including small trash enclosures, and expensive asphalt damage due to additional trash truck traffic. Staff also met individually with trash haulers regularly throughout the project to ensure the options were feasible for them and to integrate their perspectives. The majority of the groups with which City staff engaged were supportive of the project’s direction, and ASCSU (the CSU student government) submitted a memorandum of support for the project, included as Attachment 10. A summary of input from City boards and commissions is included in Attachment 9, and was generally supportive of the project. The Air Quality Advisory Board passed a motion in support of the project. An advisory group of City staff members also provided valuable insight and assistance for the project. Members were from the following City departments: Communications and Public Involvement, Social Sustainability, Economic Health, Finance, Utilities Customer Accounts, City Attorney’s Office. Summary Based on analysis of options to advance progress on the community zero waste goals and public input, staff recommends the following modification to the PAYT ordinance to expand it to a Community Recycling Ordinance:  80% price difference between trash cart sizes for single-family homes  bundled trash and recycling for multi-family and commercial sectors (effective in 18 months) October 13, 2015 Page 7  future (2017 or 2018) bundling of organics service for single-family homes  future (2017 or 2018) requirement of food scraps composting from grocers and large restaurants Support for City goals Implementing the recommended options is modeled to achieve the City’s goal of recycling or composting 75% of discards by 2020. Additional innovative facilities and programs would likely be needed to continue progress toward the ultimate goal of zero waste, but the Community Recycling Ordinance project is a significant step toward achieving waste reduction. The Community Recycling Ordinance project is estimated to achieve a reduction in 108,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent annually at full implementation. Details of the amount of diversion and greenhouse gas reductions are included in Attachment 1. ATTACHMENTS 1. Comparison and Analysis of Options for Community Recycling Ordinance (PDF) 2. Current Recycling Programs in Fort Collins (PDF) 3. Community Recycling Ordinance Recommended Implementation Timeline (PDF) 4. Community Recycling Ordinance Alignment with Established City Plans and Goals (PDF) 5. Residential Pay-As-You-Throw Price Difference Between Trash Cart Sizes Options (PDF) 6. Public Engagement Summary (PDF) 7. Sustainability Assessment Summary and Tool (PDF) 8. Summary of Feedback from Online Questionnaire (PDF) 9. Summary of Feedback from Boards and Commissions (PDF) 10. Memorandum of Support from ASCSU (PDF) 11. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Comparison & Analysis of Options for Community Recycling Ordinance Estimated diversion impact Estimated GHG impacts (MTCO2E) Estimated cost to user Comments 1a: Single-family 80% price difference between trash can sizes (recommended option) No change from current system No change from current system Cost savings for 64- and 96-gallon customers. Helps to reduce impacts to these customers from higher rates for additional services. Research shows to be ideal price differential – keeps same diversion as 100% price difference, but helps keep costs reasonable for 64- and 96-gal users 1b: Single-family 50% price difference between trash can sizes (alternative option) Less diversion than current system Potential increase More significant cost savings for 64- and 96- gallon customers. Helps to reduce impacts to these customers from higher rates for additional services. Research shows to be minimal price differential to maintain diversion impact of Pay-As-You-Throw structure. Less effective diversion results than 80% price difference. 2a: Multi-family / commercial bundling trash & recycling service (recommended option) 15,000 tons Current City Programs and Regulations for Recycling in Fort Collins WRAP stands for the Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program, a City program that started in 2012 and helps businesses and apartment complexes start or improve recycling programs. Education Incentive Mandate Single-family residential General recycling education Pay-As-You-Throw ordinance Landfill ban on cardboard and electronics Businesses General recycling education Free waste audit, educational materials (WRAP) In-person outreach campaign (WRAP) Rebate for starting recycling (up to $500) (WRAP) Landfill ban on cardboard and electronics Apartments and condos General recycling education Free waste audit, educational materials (WRAP) Rebate for starting recycling (up to $500) (WRAP) Landfill ban on cardboard and electronics ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 Recommended Timeline of Implementation for Community Recycling Ordinance Options Single-Family Homes Multi-Family Units Businesses Short term: Adjust Pay-As-You- Throw (~2016-2017) Assumes increased education and hands-on assistance from City. Current system:  Bundled recycling & trash service & costs  Pay more for more trash service o 100% price difference between sizes of trash carts Add: 1a) 80% price difference between sizes of trash carts 3) All haulers must offer option of weekly yard trimmings collection (for separate charge) Current system:  Pay more for more trash service  68% of multi-family complexes subscribe to service Add: 2a) Bundle recycling in with trash service, (25-50% of service volume as recycling) o Have hardship exclusion form / process that is filed with City o 18 month roll-out Current system:  Pay more for more trash service  48% of businesses subscribe to service Add: 2a) Bundle recycling in with trash service (25-50% of service volume as recycling) o Have hardship exclusion form / process that is filed with City o 18 month roll-out Medium term: Collect organics (~2017 – 2018) 4) Phase in collection of food scraps, yard trimmings, and food-soiled paper (bundled with trash service) Haulers have option to offer every-other- week trash collection for customers with organics collection 5) Require collection of food scraps from grocers, large restaurants Longer term: Ban materials from landfill disposal (Action on these options not recommended until other programs well- Page 2 Alternative Options for Community Recycling Ordinance Single-Family Homes Multi-Family Units Businesses Short term: Adjust Pay-As-You- Throw (~2016-2017) Assumes increased education and hands-on assistance from City. 1b) 50% price difference between trash can sizes 2b) Require recycling service  Separate fee on bill  Hauler / customer determine amount of recycling 2b) Require recycling service  Separate fee on bill  Hauler / customer determine amount of recycling A •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. •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. • 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. •Principle ENV 17: The City will act as a steward of the environment and public health by using its regulatory authority. City Plan •4.6. Engage citizens in ways to educate and change behavior toward more sustainable living practices. •4.11. Demonstrate progress toward achieving zero waste •within the community and the City organization. Strategic Plan •ENV 6: Percent decrease in municipal Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from 2005 baseline •ENV 7: Community per capita per day of solid waste generation •ENV10: Community solid waste diversion rate •ENV 12: Tons of community recycled or composted materials, including cardboard Budgeting for Outcomes Metrics •Waste Diversion Goals •Recycle or compost 75% of community's discards by 2020 •Recycle or compost 90% of community's discards by 2025 •Zero waste by 2030 •Reduce per capita waste generation to 2.8 pounds / day by 2025 •Climate Action Goals •20% beow 2005 levels by 2020 •80% below 2005 by 2030 •Carbon neutral by 2050 City Council- Adopted Goals Alignment of Community Recycling Ordinance Project with Established Plans and Goals ATTACHMENT 4 Please note that prices are meant only as examples – actual pricing is set by trash and recycling haulers. $30 $45 $27 $39 $15 $23 $30 $- $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 $40 $45 $50 32 gallon price 64 gallon price 96 gallon price Examples of Varying Price Differences Between Trash Cart Sizes in Single-Family Pay-As-You-Throw Ordinance 100% (current) 80% (recommended) 50% (alternative) ATTACHMENT 5 Page 1 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY PROJECT TITLE: Community Recycling Ordinance OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL: Collaborate with key stakeholders to develop new policy recommendations based on community feedback. BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: What is important to keep about our current recycling system Fort Collins and which next steps are of most interest in meeting our waste reduction goals as a community? City Boards and Commissions Presentations Affordable Housing Advisory Board, Aug. 6 Senior Advisory Board, Sept. 9 Economic Advisory Board, Sept. 16 Natural Resources Advisory Board, Sept. 16 Air Quality Advisory Board, Sept 21 Stakeholder Group Presentations / Meetings All Property Services, July 16 Sustainable Living Association, July 21 Chamber LLAC, July 24 League of Women Voters, July 30 ASCSU Community Affairs, Aug. 4 ClimateWise Members, Aug. 11 Multi-Family Managers, Aug. 11 Northern Colorado Clean Cities Coalition, Aug. 17 CSU Executive Faculty Committee, Aug. 25 North Fort Collins Business Assoc’n, Aug. 26 South Fort Collins Business Association, Sept. 8 City Issues and Answers, Sept. 10 Northern Colorado Rental Housing Assoc’n, Sept. 15 CSU President’s Sustainability Committee, Sept. 21 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT CONDUCTED: Public Meetings • June 30, 6:30 p.m., 215 N. Mason St. Community Room • July 1, 11:30 a.m. Senior Center • August 11, 6:30 p.m. Council Tree Library •August 12, 11:30 a.m. Chamber of Commerce Public Events • CSU Lagoon Concert Series • Every Wednesday July 1 - Aug 5 • Larimer County Farmers' Market • September 12 • Sustainable Living Fair • September 12, 13 • CSU International Women's Welcome • September 1 Online & Mobile Activities • Project website with related documents •Online questionnaire • 202 responses • 4 min YouTube video about project Page 2 Advisory Boards External Advisory Board (met June 22, July 21, Aug. 5, Aug. 12, Aug. 24, Sept. 14) Members:  Bob Mann, Natural Resources Advisory Board  Joe Piesman, resident  Sarah Gallup, resident  John Drigot, Poudre Valley Hospital  Stacey Baumgarn, CSU  John Holcomb, Poudre School District  Ray Meyer, Ram Waste  John Puma, Ram Waste  JP Puma, Ram Waste  Matt Gallegos, Gallegos Sanitation  John Newman, Waste Not  Todd Noe, Waste Management  Rich Morford, Waste Management  Scott Hutchings, Waste Management  Pete Gazlay, Total Facility Care & Chamber of Commerce LLAC President  Carrie Gillis, multi-family property management, Chamber of Commerce LLAC member  Stephen Gillette, Larimer County Solid Waste  Hunter Buffington, Sustainable Fort Collins  Mary Anderson, Sierra Club  Georgia Locker, League of Women Voters  Ginny Sawyer, facilitator Internal Advisory Board (met May 27, July 23, Aug. 5, Aug. 26, Sept. 28) Members from: Communications and Public Involvement, Social Sustainability, Economic Health, Finance, Utilities Customer Accounts, City Attorney’s office. 1 SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY DATE: 9/23/15 SUBJECT: Sustainability Assessment Summary for Community Recycling Ordinance Key issues identified  Environmental: o Additional recycling generated by the Community Recycling Ordinance will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and preserve natural resources. o Collecting additional materials will likely mean additional collection vehicles in operation in Fort Collins  Social: o Concern of potential impact of increased pricing on lower income residents  Economic: o It is unclear whether this project results in a net positive for the local economy o Additional service provided by haulers requires investments in staff and infrastructure Suggested mitigation actions  Environmental: o Haulers will maximize efficiencies in their routes and the benefits of recycling or composting the materials collected outweighs the impacts of their collection and hauling.  Social: o Focus educational messaging around “right sizing” options to decrease trash bills o 80% differential between trash cart sizes to single-family rates decreases the price for medium and large size trash subscribers  Economic: o Phasing in requirements o When companies right-size their bins, they are likely to have minimal impact on their cost of service Economic , 0.3 Social , 0.2 Environmental 1.5 Rating Average, 1.1 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Sustainability Rating Rating without mitigation Rating with mitigation Rating Legend 3 Very positive 2 Moderately positive 1 Slightly positive 0 Not relevant or neutral -1 Slightly negative -2 Moderately negative, impact likely -3 Very negative, impact expected ATTACHMENT 7 2 City of Fort Collins SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL (SAT) (September 2015) Creating a sustainable community Plan Fort Collins is an expression of the community’s resolve to act sustainably: to systemically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend. Brief description of proposal This project is an implementation of the Road to Zero Waste plan, and proposes to update the community’s main recycling ordinance by:  Updating the current Pay-As-You-Throw ordinance o Allow haulers to charge an 80% price difference between the sizes of trash carts rather than the current 100% price difference between trash cart sizes  Expanding the current recycling ordinance o Require weekly yard trimmings collection option for single-family homes o Require multi-family and commercial customers to have recycling service bundled in with trash service o Require collection of food scraps from large grocers and restaurants in 2017 or 2018 o Create a phase-in plan for collecting yard trimmings and food scraps from single-family home residents starting in 2017 or 2018 Staff lead(s): Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Planner, Environmental Services, 970-221-6288 3 Social Equity Described: Placing priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal human rights, including those pertaining to civil, political, social, economic, and cultural concerns. Providing adequate access to employment, food, housing, clothing, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Eliminating systemic barriers to equitable treatment and inclusion, and accommodating the differences among people. Emphasizing justice, impartiality, and equal opportunity for all. Goal/Outcome: It is our priority to support an equitable and adequate social system that ensures access to employment, food, housing, clothing, education, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Additionally, we support equal access to services and seek to avoid negative impact for all people regardless of age, economic status, ability, immigration or citizenship status, race/ethnicity, gender, relationship status, religion, or sexual orientation. Equal opportunities for all people are sought. A community in which basic human rights are addressed, basic human needs are met, and all people have access to tools and resources to develop their capacity. This tool will help identify how the proposal affects community members and if there is a difference in how the decisions affect one or more social groups. Areas of consideration in creating a vibrant socially equitable Fort Collins are: basic needs, inclusion, community safety, culture, neighborhoods, and advancing social equity. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis.  Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? Proposal Description 1. Meeting Basic Human Needs • How does the proposal impact access to food, shelter, employment, health care, educational and recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy living environment or social services? • Does this proposal affect the physical or mental health of individuals, or the status of public health in our community? • How does this proposal contribute to helping people achieve and maintain an adequate standard of living, including housing, or food affordability, employment opportunities, healthy Analysis/Discussion  The updated Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) ordinance will still enable residents to decrease their trash generation and save money on their trash bills  Increased recycling has a documented positive effect on job creation.  Due to the current recyclables processing contract, trash and recycling haulers need to increase their current rates. Adding or expanding recycling could increase the cost of trash service, which may result in a corresponding cost increase for residents, especially renters. 4 families, or other resiliency factors?  By recycling and composting more materials, will expand the lifespan of the Larimer County landfill. This will help delay the significant trash cost increase that will likely result when the Larimer County landfill closes.  Expanding Pay-As-You-Throw to multifamily ensures equal access to recycling opportunities for all community members.  These policies will have extensive promotional campaigns to implement them. Those will highlight the best options are to reduce wasting and reuse products more. Many waste reduction programs will benefit lower income residents by increasing the amount and quality of donated or lower cost food, clothing, furniture and building materials available to them through thrift stores and social service agencies.  Most multifamily complexes and businesses should be able to decrease trash services (by decreasing the size of trash containers collected, or the frequency of collection) by an equal amount. It’s the same amount of material being collected. 2. Addressing Inequities and being Inclusive • Are there any inequities to specific population subsets in this proposal? If so, how will they be addressed? • Does this proposal meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act? • How does this proposal support the participation, growth and healthy development of our youth? Does it include Developmental Assets? • If the proposal affects a vulnerable section of our community (i.e. youth, persons with disabilities, etc.)  Currently roughly half of Fort Collins residents live in multi-family housing. Only 68% of multi-family housing has recycling service. The remaining 32% of multi-family housing residents currently are forced to self-haul their recycling to the drop-off center or are excluded from recycling. This proposal would ensure all residents have access to recycling where they live, no matter their type of housing.  Due to the landfill ban on cardboard, some apartment complexes have chosen to not provide recycling on site, but have included in their leases that residents must self-haul their recyclables to a recycling site, placing an extra burden on them (an especially difficult one if they don’t have a vehicle).  Concerns exist about adding recycling service increasing trash bills, thereby affecting housing affordability.  All subsidized affordable housing units in Fort Collins already have adequate recycling, so will not be affected by the recycling 5 expansion requirements. This also highlights that recycling is not a significant factor in housing affordability.  If disabled residents live in multi-family housing, it is very unlikely they would be able to self-haul their recyclables to a drop-off center. Having recycling service at their housing location would enable disabled residents to recycle.  All schools in Poudre School District recycle. Having recycling at all residences ensures youth have consistent recycling messaging and opportunities at home and at school. 3. Ensuring Community Safety • How does this proposal address the specific safety and personal security needs of groups within the community, including women, people with disabilities, seniors, minorities, religious groups, children, immigrants, workers and others?  Residents who obtain donated food or reused clothing, furniture and building materials helps low-income residents meet their basic needs.  Decreasing illegal dumping helps promote cleanliness and safety  Reduction of harmful air pollutants by removing organics from landfill. 4. Culture • Is this proposal culturally appropriate and how does it affirm or deny the cultures of diverse communities? • How does this proposal create opportunities for artistic and cultural expression?  This proposal is culturally unbiased; this ordinance would apply to all citizens with a community-wide benefit.  The culture of Fort Collins is one of sustainability; this project is consistent with, allows participation of all residents in, and confirms that culture. 5. Addressing the Needs of Neighborhoods • How does this proposal impact specific Fort Collins neighborhoods? • How are community members, stakeholders and interested parties provided with opportunities for meaningful participation in the decision making process of this proposal? • How does this proposal enhance neighborhoods and stakeholders’ sense of commitment and stewardship to our community?  Enhances community and neighborhood cohesion through outreach and education programs employed to implement these programs, and cooperation with neighborhood based community gardens, composting and farmers markets.  ESD staff has conducted extensive community outreach throughout this project (before options were created, and through the process of narrowing down recommendations). Participation options have included online comments and surveys, meetings with different stakeholders and community groups, and in-person Public Open Houses that were conducted at various times of the day and locations throughout the community.  Through expanded recycling and composting, this proposal provides 6 residents pride in reducing the amount of material sent to landfill  Ordinance marketing materials will promote opportunities for neighbors to connect with each other regarding recycling education and resources for neighborhoods to support recycling.  Additional recycling and yard waste containers could be difficult to store in compliance with the screened containers ordinance for homes with no fence or garage (or in a small garage). 6. Building Capacity to Advance Social Equity • What plans have been made to communicate about and share the activities and impacts of this proposal within the City organization and/or the community? • How does this proposal strengthen collaboration and cooperation between the City organization and community members?  ESD staff has communicated about the development of this project and received input from a wide variety of community members and City staff.  Once implemented, this project will involve extensive education and assistance to those implementing it. Social Equity Summary Key issues:  Concern of potential impact of increased pricing on lower income residents Potential mitigation strategies:  Focus educational messaging around “right sizing” options to decrease trash bills  80% differential between trash cart sizes to single-family rates decreases the price for medium and large size trash subscribers Overall, the effect of this proposal on social equity would be: Please reach a consensus on the rating and enter an “x” in one of the following boxes +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact Very negative, impact 7 0.2 likely expected xxxx xxx xx Environmental Health Described: Healthy, resilient ecosystems, clean air, water, and land. Decreased pollution and waste, lower carbon emissions that contribute to climate change, lower fossil fuel use, decreased or no toxic product use. Prevent pollution, reduce use, promote reuse, and recycle natural resources. Goal/Outcome: Protect, preserve, and restore the natural environment to ensure long-term maintenance of ecosystem functions necessary for support of future generations of all species. Avoid or eliminate adverse environmental impacts of all activities, continually review all activities to identify and implement strategies to prevent pollution; reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency; conserve water; reduce consumption and waste of natural resources; reuse, recycle and purchase recycled content products; reduce reliance on non-renewable resources. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis. • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Environmental Impact • Does this proposal affect ecosystem functions or processes related to land, water, air, or plant or animal communities? • Will this proposal generate data or knowledge related to the use of resources? • Will this proposal promote or support education in prevention of pollution, and effective practices for reducing, reusing, and recycling of natural resources? • Does this proposal require or promote the continuous improvement of the environmental performance of the City organization or community? • Will this proposal affect the visual/landscape or aesthetic elements of the community? Analysis/Discussion  The goal of this project is to recycle a substantial amount of material that is currently being landfilled.  Additional education about recycling, reducing trash bin size / service (“right-sizing” trash bins) and hands-on assistance for doing so are central to this project.  Preventing material from being landfilled prevents potential air and water pollution from the landfill.  This project is capable of generating enough additional recycling and composting to meet the City’s goal of recycling or composting 75% of materials by 2020 compared to the current rate of 68% waste 8 reduction. 2. Climate Change • Does this proposal directly generate or require the generation of greenhouse gases (such as through electricity consumption or transportation)? • How does this proposal align with the carbon reduction goals for 2020 goal adopted by the City Council? • Will this proposal, or ongoing operations result in an increase or decrease in greenhouse gas emissions? • How does this proposal affect the community’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise mitigate adverse climate change activities?  By increasing recycling, less materials will be created from natural resources resulting in energy savings and significant greenhouse gas prevention.  This project prevents the landfilling of organic materials, which generate methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas, if sent to the landfill.  The implementation plan for the Climate Action Plan calls for this project as a first implementation step.  Although this project could result in an increase in trucks collecting materials from customers, the recycling and composting of the materials significantly outweighs the impacts from additional collection vehicles.  This project could also help reduce vehicle miles traveled due to multi-family residents now being able to recycle on site who previously had to drive their recyclables to a recycling drop-off center.  The Road to Zero Waste Plan recommended an approach for haulers to consider that would not increase the number of trucks once these full programs are implemented that would collect organics every week and recycling and trash every other week. That would enable haulers to provide services with just 2 trucks per route, the same as they currently use. 3. Protect, Preserve, Restore • Does this proposal result in the development or modification of land resources or ecosystem functions? • Does this proposal align itself with policies and procedures related to the preservation or restoration of natural habitat, greenways, protected wetlands, migratory pathways, or the urban growth boundary • How does this proposal serve to protect, preserve, or restore important ecological functions or processes?  With the Larimer County Landfill quickly filling up, this ordinance has the potential to extend the life of the landfill. 9 4. Pollution Prevention • Does this proposal generate, or cause to be generated, waste products that can contaminate the environment? • Does this proposal require or promote pollution prevention through choice of materials, chemicals, operational practices and/or engineering controls? • Does this proposal require or promote prevention of pollution from toxic substances or other pollutants regulated by the state or federal government? • Will this proposal create significant amounts of waste or pollution?  This project is not anticipated to generate pollutants. By recycling or composting materials, it is likely to prevent air and water pollution from local landfills.  These policies will promote pollution prevention and reducing wasting through outreach and education programs associated with their implementation. 5. Rethink, Replace, Reduce, Reuse, Recirculate/Recycle • Does this proposal prioritize the rethinking of the materials or goods needed, reduction of resource or materials use, reuse of current natural resources or materials or energy products, or result in byproducts that are recyclable or can be re-circulated?  Recycling, composting, and reducing waste are the primary objectives of this project 6. Emphasize Local • Does this proposal emphasize use of local materials, vendors, and or services to reduce resources and environmental impact of producing and transporting proposed goods and materials? • Will the proposal cause adverse environmental effects somewhere other than the place where the action will take place?  The more recycled materials are generated locally, the greater the likelihood that a company using recycled materials as a source material could operate in Fort Collins.  Composting and organics recycling processes must be done locally, as these materials cannot be shipped great distances. As a result of the proposed policies, local businesses will be able to invest in processing organics even more locally, in Larimer County. Environmental Health Summary Key issues:  Additional recycling generated by the Community Recycling Ordinance will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and preserve natural resources. 10  Collecting additional materials will likely mean additional collection vehicles in operation in Fort Collins Potential mitigation strategies:  Haulers will maximize efficiencies in their routes and the benefits of recycling or composting the materials collected outweighs the impacts of their collection and hauling. Overall, the effect of this proposal on environmental health would be: Please reach a consensus on the rating and enter an “x” in one of the following boxes 2.7 +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected xxxxx xx Economic Health Described: Support of healthy local economy with new jobs, businesses, and economic opportunities; focus on development of a diverse economy, enhanced sustainable practices for existing businesses, green and clean technology jobs, creation or retention of family waged jobs. Goal/Outcome: A stable, diverse and equitable economy; support of business development opportunities. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Infrastructure and Government • How will this proposal benefit the local economy? • If this proposal is an investment in infrastructure is it designed and will it be managed to optimize the use of Analysis/Discussion  Increased recycling has a documented positive effect on job creation.  The increased services provided for in this project are provided by the private sector and are fully funded by user fees. 11 resources including operating in a fossil fuel constrained society? • Can the proposal be funded partially or fully by grants, user fees or charges, staged development, or partnering with another agency? • How will the proposal impact business growth or operations (ability to complete desired project or remain in operation), such as access to needed permits, infrastructure and capital?  By the City adopting these policies, haulers and processors are able to get financing to buy equipment to meet this new demand for increased services.  This proposal will likely increase the cost of trash service for businesses, including small businesses, and apartment complexes that do not currently recycle.  These requirements would provide a level playing field for businesses and apartment complexes – every business and apartment complex would have (and have to pay for) similar levels of recycling service (48% of businesses currently have recycling service in Fort Collins and 68% of apartment complexes, according to trash hauling companies.)  There is a plan to phase in the services to allow trash haulers to invest in additional infrastructure over time rather than all at once.  There is the potential to have little impact on businesses since the increased cost in recycling will be offset by the decrease in trash haul fees if locations “right size” or decrease their trash bins.  Due to having more customer density and resulting economies of scale, it is possible that rates for locations that already recycle may slightly decrease.  This project will result in additional costs for businesses that are providing the services. 2. Employment and Training • What are the impacts of this proposal on job creation within Larimer County? • Are apprenticeships, volunteer or intern opportunities available? • How will this proposal enhance the skills of the local workforce?  Increased recycling has a documented positive effect on job creation.  Volunteer opportunities will likely be created to assist with education about the new ordinance.  Additional staff for the trash / recycling hauling companies will likely be hired as a result of this project.  Increased emphasis on recycling and related technology could provide opportunities for job training with local community colleges  The recycling and composting industries provide employment at wages across the wage and skills spectrum, many with upward mobility opportunities.  Possible opportunities for waste/recycling technician job creation. 3. Diversified and Innovative Economy • How does this proposal support innovative or  Many of the technologies that will be used in response to these policies are “clean technologies” and the jobs created are “green” 12 entrepreneurial activity? • Will “clean technology” or “green” jobs be created in this proposal? • How will the proposal impact start-up or existing businesses or development projects? jobs.  By adopting these policies, the City will be recognized as an innovative policy leader which will attract additional investments in technology and program innovations.  Colorado State University is already demonstrating innovative technologies for composting and organics recycling. CSU could help evaluate, study, design and help private companies develop new products and services to meet the new demand of these policies.  See bullets in sections 1 and 2 about job creation and impact to existing businesses.  Possible skills-up training opportunity for NFP companies that partner with for-profit companies who collect recycling. 4. Support or Develop Sustainable Businesses • What percentage of this proposal budget relies on local services or products? Identify purchases from Larimer County and the State of Colorado. • Will this proposal enhance the tools available to businesses to incorporate more sustainable practices in operations and products? • Are there opportunities to profile sustainable and socially responsible leadership of local businesses or educate businesses on triple bottom line practices?  This project will be essential in helping businesses and apartment complexes who do not currently recycle to adopt this sustainable practice, which not only conserves natural resources, but will provide education to employees, customers, and residents about recycling. The City will provide educational materials and assistance programs, including WRAP and ClimateWise, to help with this adoption and education.  May provide additional opportunities to partner with ClimateWise partners on innovative ideas and collaboration.  This project will enhance the sustainable reputation of Fort Collins, attracting attention to existing Fort Collins businesses and potentially attracting additional businesses or skilled employees with an interest in sustainability.  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, and Intel. New Belgium Brewery is being certified as a Zero Waste Facility by the U.S. Zero Waste Business Council. 5. Relevance to Local Economic Development Strategy  This project supports the City Council-adopted Economic Health Department Strategic Plan’s focus on “The Climate Economy”. 13 Economic Prosperity Summary Key issues:  It is unclear whether this project results in a net positive for the local economy  Additional service provided by haulers requires investments in staff and infrastructure Potential mitigation strategies:  Phasing in requirements  When companies right-size their bins, they are likely to have minimal impact on their cost of service Overall, the effect of this proposal on economic prosperity will be: Please reach a consensus on the rating and enter an “x” in one of the following boxes 0.3 +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected xxxx ½ x ½ xx COMMUNITY RECYCLING ORDINANCE ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE: SUMMARY OF THEMES In June 2015, an online questionnaire was posted at fcgov.com/recycling/update.php for members of the public to share their opinions on the current recycling system in Fort Collins and about changes they’d like to see. In September, the questionnaire was replaced with new questions asking opinions about the draft options generated for the Community Recycling Ordinance. The questions for both were intentionally open-ended to ensure the responses reflect the issues most important to respondents. The respondents were self-selected and the summary provided is not statistically significant. Key themes from questionnaire #1 (total responses: 172)  Supportive of including multi-family properties in recycling (103)  Supportive of including commercial properties in recycling (100)  Add curbside yard waste collection (51)  Like the current Pay-As-You-Throw system (41) o keeping recycling and trash service bundled / not paying extra for recycling  Would like recycling picked up weekly (24)  Offer a free yard waste drop-off (13)  Want more education (15) Key themes from questionnaire #2 (total responses: 76)  In favor of both yard waste and food scraps curbside collection (35)  Inclusion of multi-family and commercial properties in Pay-As-You-Throw (24)  Keep the price of services low (15)  Supportive of materials ban (12)  Continue improving the current system (10)  Do not like any of the options (8)  Implement some of the proposed options sooner (4) Questions asked in questionnaire #1 1. What about Fort Collins single-family trash and recycling service should stay the same? What would you like to change? 2. Currently, the landfill ban on cardboard and electronics are the only recycling ordinances that apply to multi-family properties within the City. Do you think other recycling ordinances should apply to multi-family properties and why? 3. Currently, the landfill ban on cardboard and electronics are the only recycling ordinances that apply to commercial properties within the City. Do you think other recycling ordinances should apply to commercial properties and why? 4. What about yard waste recycling/disposal in Fort Collins works for you? What would you change? 5. Do you have any other comments about recycling in Fort Collins? Questions asked in questionnaire #2 1. What do you like about the proposed options for the Community Recycling Ordinance and why? 2. What would you change about the proposed options for the Community Recycling Ordinance and why? 3. Do you have questions about the proposed options for the Community Recycling Ordinance? 4. Are there any options not included that you would like to see included? If so, what are they and why are they important? 5. What is the main message you’d like the City to hear about recycling in Fort Collins? ATTACHMENT 8 Page 1 Summary of Feedback from City Boards and Commissions MINUTES : CITY OF FORT COLLINS AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD Date: Thursday, August 6, 2015 Location: CIC Room, City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave. Time: 4:00–6:00pm Board Members Present Board Members Absent Troy Jones, chair Eloise Emery Jeffrey Johnson Diane Cohn Terence Hoaglund Tatiana Martin Curt Lyons AGENDA ITEM 1: Community Recycling Ordinance Reasons recycling is important for more than environment: economic development potential, large employment industry, produces more jobs than landfilling, energy savings from recycling, etc. Ex: takes 95% less energy to recycle aluminum than to create new. Significant GHG benefits to recycling as well. Recycling system from single-family residential: 1. Put recycling at curb, 2. Pay hauler, 3. To Larimer county recycling center, 4. Materials recovery facility in Denver (contaminates to landfill), 5. End markets (international) where made into new products. Recyclables are at a low value in market right now and have a more challenging contract at the recycling center. Can address shifts in market and system with this regularly scheduled update. Have a 6-10% contamination rate, which is reasonable. Pay-as-you- Throw ordinance was adopted in 1995; has become best practice. This update includes potential for expansion. Road to Zero Waste includes goal of 75% diversion by 2020, 95% by 2025, and 0 waste by 2030. City also has landfill bans on electronic waste and cardboard. Existing programs include education to all, free waste audits and rebates for businesses and multifamily residential, Pay-as-you-Throw for single-family residential, etc. Caroline showed graph of diversion rates: landfilled materials have remained consistent despite increase in population. Recycling and composting has increased steadily; much of recent uptick is from construction dirt (mall, Woodward, flood rebuilding). Pay-as-you-Throw ordinance requires trash and recycling rates are bundled for single-family residential, so no additional charge for recycling. Also requires trash pricing based on volume of trash can subscription. Multifamily residential and businesses are combined into commercial trash system. In Fort Collins, commercial prices are based on size of dumpster and recycling is a separate fee. 95% of single-family homes recycle, 67% of multifamily, and 48% of businesses. Disparate impact of ease of recycling for those living in multifamily. Currently industrial has highest diversion rate. This project does not focus on industrial recycling. Community Recycling Ordinance looks at adapting program to current needs, expanding Pay-as-you-Throw to commercial customers, and including yard waste collection options. Project includes case studies (available on website at fcgov.com/recycling/update.php) and will include spectrum of options/recommendations, public outreach (public meetings, stakeholder meetings, and community advisory group), and Council work session October 13. Two public meetings next week. Online survey, email newsletter, and FAQs available online. ATTACHMENT 9 Page 2 Comments/Q&A  Sue: Why is this important to affordable housing? o Caroline: Adding additional service impacts trash bills. How much service, of what type, and how much is it worth paying for? o Sue: Will any options bundle like current ordinance for multifamily.  Caroline: One main option is to expand Pay-as-you-Throw to commercial and multifamily, bundling a certain amount of recycling with trash service automatically and having additional recycling available at lower cost than trash. In tandem could add user responsibility for recycling: not allowing recyclables to be put in the trash. Communities tend to adopt together. Also discussing what to do with bulky goods. Multifamily has issues with dumping of bulky goods (ex: furniture, appliances, mattresses). Considering automatic inclusion of bulky goods collection in single-family residential.  Troy: Haulers used to get paid and now paying for recycling? o Caroline: Yes. Customers have subscribed to service. Hauler used to get paid for recyclables. Majority of cost is overhead: trucks, employees, gas, etc. Fees at recycling facility are smaller portion of cost but do impact business. Want to create ordinance that is flexible with market.  Troy: Most of affordable housing in Fort Collins is multifamily. Any political will at Council level to subsidize recycling? o Tatiana: Or incentives?  Caroline: If expanded Pay-as-you-Throw to commercial and multifamily, the goal is to incentivize recycling. Project is not to point where can understand impact to bills yet. Have fixed amount of waste, whether going out in trash or recycling. People forget that can downsize trash bin when add recycling, which can make it cost neutral or even cost beneficial. o Tatiana: Current HOA doesn’t offer recycling as it is not cost beneficial.  Eloise: Went to board of her HOA and talked them into adding recycling. o Eloise: WRAP program?  Caroline: Offers rebates for starting recycling program. Goal is to shave off cost speed bump of starting service. Businesses need to purchase recycling bins for inside or create an enclosure, so a rebate is available for them too.  Diane: Want affordable housing developers to not have to add costs to projects. Want to make absolutely sure that have options, but additional protections for cost for affordable housing units and developers. For ongoing cost of service. o Troy: If translates to higher rent want to prevent that. o Diane: Don’t want to add fees to low income people.  Terence: Need more education on illegal dumping in dumpsters. o Caroline: Have been working with consultants on this issue. Have not found a perfect solution, but aware of the problem.  Troy: Good goal to have all residents recycle. Someone has to pay for it. Recommend Council finding money to subsidize affordable housing recycling to offset impact that could change rent. o Sue: Or create different rate for qualified affordable housing. o Troy: Would be nice if community as whole has value to not over burden those who cannot afford, but still give opportunity. o Caroline: Have had calls about cardboard ordinance where property manager is not providing cardboard recycling (not required), but then residents have to self-haul. Page 3 MINUTES: CITY OF FORT COLLINS SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 Time: 11:30–1:30pm Call to order 11:26 am I. Administrative Items a. Attendance: Rich Feller, Katie Stieber, Bill Hilsmeier, Irisa Luft, Suzanne King, Patricia Hously, Diane Smith i. Unexcused: Alan Beatty, Lawrence Bontempo ii. Excused: Angela Condit, Ann Lefler, Joann Thomas b. Correspondence: Bridging the Gap postcard, Aging Mastery flyer c. Updates on SAB activities last month: none II. Public Participation: none III. Speakers a. Pete Iengo – Utilities Low Income Assistance b. Caroline Mitchell – Community Recycling Ordinance IV. Comments of City Council Periodic Review – on agenda in error V. New Business a. Education b. Outreach c. Advocacy i. Response to community recycling – given during presentation ii. Letter to Affordable Housing Board 1. Discussion on condominiums and associations Meeting Adjourned: 1:32 PM Page 4 MINUTES: CITY OF FORT COLLINS ECONOMIC ADVISORY COMMISSION Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 Location: CIC Room, City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave. Time: 11:00am–1:30pm Commission Members Present Commission Members Absent Linda Stanley Sam Solt, Chair Denny Otsuga Ann Hutchison Kim Dale (arrived 11:50) Kristin Owens Ted Settle Glen Colton AGENDA ITEM 3—Community Recycling Ordinance In 1995 passed Pay-As-You-Throw ordinance, which has since become a best practice. Has been updated a few times throughout the years. Two part project: 1. Continuous improvement, 2. Tool for greater applications. Council has adopted a diversion rate goal of 50% in 1999, which has been surpassed. New goals include 75% diversion by 2020. In 2007 passed landfill ban on electronics, in 2013 added ban on cardboard. Role of City is education, policy framework and ordinances. Hauling is done by private companies. Current ordinance: trash and recycling rates are bundled for single- family residential and is based on volume of can subscription. Commercial and multifamily are generally serviced with dumpsters. Pricing is based on volume and service frequency. Recycling is not bundled, but is a separate service. 95% of single-family homes, 68% of multifamily complexes, and 48% of commercial have subscribed to recycling. Have researched case studies, best practices, and have done extensive community outreach. Working with Zero Waste Associates on data collection and draft options for the ordinance. Draft options developed from research and feedback: allowing a baseline fee to mitigate economic impact of diversion, requiring recycling service for all, having all haulers offer yard trimming collection for single-family residential, exploring having businesses that create large amounts of food scraps/organics compost, etc. Massive bio-digester has been built in Kersey: primarily built for feedlot and dairy waste, but can take food scraps. Generates and captures methane. Other options in medium term include phasing in organics collection (food scraps with yard trimmings). Many communities moving to every other week for trash when add organics to weekly collection. Medium term: follow single-family model and bundle trash and recycling for multifamily and business. Also thinking about phasing in organics for businesses. Longer term potentially expanding landfill ban on recyclables/organics. Greatest amount of diversion can come from compostables. Could get 75% diversion by 2020 with these options. Goal is to not have negative economic impact. However, adding 96 gallon cart of recycling is about $20-30 per month. If decrease trash service by amount of recycling diverted, could mitigate additional cost. Additional benefits include meeting CAP and RZW goals, positive effect on job creation by not landfilling (approx. 250 jobs), extends life of landfill which only has 10 years left. Anticipate significant increase in trash service prices when landfill closes. Discussion/Q & A:  Pricing is not set, but ratio is? o Yes. o Price difference is negligible between sizes.  HOAs can get own contracts, but price difference should be 100% between sizes.  Some people don’t subscribe to trash service at all. o Percentages are of those who have trash service. One of complaints hearing at apartment complexes and businesses is illegal dumping. Discussing ideas about enforcing trash subscription.  Municipalities in Japan are requiring subscription to trash service because cost got so high dumping was becoming a concern.  In Fort Collins, open dumping has not been an issue. Page 5 Page 6  Right now restaurants are putting food waste into the trash. Have we thought about a way to incentivize composting rather than requiring? Provide bins, service, etc. Would like to see trash company come for recyclables every week. Recyclables are far more volume than trash. o Every week recycling would raise rates. Cost is in truck and driver. Have been in close contact with trash haulers throughout the process. They suggest people can get more than one recycling bin. o Adding can for yard trimmings is not cheap.  Hope that argument to multifamily and commercial would focus on point of pay me now or pay me later. The cost of a new landfill must be huge. Everyone will feel it.  Base fee: understand when have utility like water need to increase base fee to cover fixed costs when conservation increases. In this case the city has three private businesses competing for customers. Haulers would like more predictable revenue, but what is rationale? Generally lose incentive for reduction when implement base fee. Agree that important to have commercial and multifamily required to recycle. Will be fall- out, but not unreasonable. Would like to see compost moved up; it would be very popular and should be required. It becomes part of daily life. Hope that we do new recycling center. Important to community. The City talks about sustainability, but our recycling program is not cutting edge. Many other places doing better than we are.  Where does PSD fall in regard to this? What are they doing? Can we partner with them to engage kids in recycling? o Being taught at young age in elementary school. o And waste for the school as well. Are kids putting food waste in compost?  Fourteen schools have composting for food waste.  PSD has great recycling and more schools want compost. Page 7 MINUTES: CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 Location: 215 N. Mason Conference Room 1A Time: 6:00–8:30pm Board Members Present Board Members Absent John Bartholow, chair Joe Halseth Kelly McDonnell Bob Mann Nancy DuTeau Jeremy Sueltenfuss Harry Edwards Luke Caldwell AGENDA ITEM 1—Community Recycling Ordinance Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Planner, previewed potential amendments to the Pay-As-You-Throw Ordinance, which are being analyzed and refined for discussion at Council’s October 13 Work Session. Pay-As-You-Throw started in 1995, and has been updated a few times. This project is to update the ordinance and provide next steps to meet community goals of Road to Zero Waste. 1999 Council passed 50% diversion rate goal which has been surpassed. Working toward 75% diversion by 2020. Also have two landfill bans: electronics and cardboard. Private sector provides hauling service; City creates policy and ordinances, and provides education to community. Existing incentive programs include Pay-As-You-Throw for single-family and rebates through WRAP program for businesses and multifamily residential. Pay-As-You-Throw bundles trash and recycling services and trash rate is based on volume of can subscription. Currently must be 100% price difference between sizes. This creates strong incentive to recycle. Currently 95% of single-family homes, 68% of multifamily, and 48% of commercial have recycling service. Newer multifamily are opening with recycling. A barrier for older multifamily is there is not physically enough space in enclosures for additional bins. Have done a lot of public outreach and consultants have done a lot of research on other communities and best practices. Short-, mid-, and long-term options staff are considering include allowing a base fee, adjusting 100% price difference for can sizes, adding food waste and/or yard trimmings collection, getting more uniform recycling for businesses and multifamily with requirement or Pay-As-You-Throw-style ordinance, collecting food scraps from large producers, banning recyclables from landfill, etc. Susie added that multifamily and business owners are experiencing illegal dumping, which has a significant financial impact. Other communities have addressed this by requiring all households to have trash service. Could be an additional amendment to the ordinance. Discussion/Q & A:  Are landfill bans monitored in any way? o Landfill managers are very careful in monitoring. o More electronic waste dumping as a result?  Some in rural areas where have nowhere to take it.  Hauler won’t pick up and landfill will not accept.  How often are waste audits happening? o Varies. Slow flow of self-identification. When do more targeted outreach campaign it picks up. Approx. 1 per month regularly; when ramp up outreach get 2 per week. Have interns who help with program. Page 8  Why is bundled system only for single-family and why is commercial/multifamily different? o Single-family homes don’t generate as much volume, so cost is in truck, driver, gas, etc. Alternative in other communities is to pay extra for recycling. In that case only about 20% of households will recycle. With Pay-As-You-Throw the more you use, the more you pay. Commercial and multifamily have much more variability in quantity. Staff has been looking into Pay-As-You-Throw for multifamily and commercial, but it is more complicated. The volume of material is significant. o Has been slow getting businesses to recycle.  If business wants to recycle have to pay a separate charge. However, about ½ of what throwing away is recyclable. If decrease dumpster size and add recycling, still have same overall volume. Many businesses don’t realize they can reduce trash service to even out cost.  Economics of recyclable material is low right now. When it was higher and the haulers could make a profit, why didn’t they do more push for recycling?  They make a lot of money from trash as well.  The draft options are ideas, correct? Asking Council whether moving in right direction? o Staff is determining now how to present to Council. The options are basically the core ideas they intend to show Council. Will look more at diversion rates related to each option.  What would be an example of phasing? o For single-family homes phasing in of organics collection, year one could have 15% subscribed, year two 50%, etc. This allows hauler to phase in service, buy carts, increase routes, etc. Gives time to work out challenges and details as well.  Would like to see more emphasis on waste reduction: less packaging, electronic billing, statements, and delivery of reading materials. Implement penalties for those businesses that choose not to participate. o Incentives instead of penalties?  Already exist. Businesses such as banks are giving incentives for e-billing, such as higher interest rate of return or free checking. Also, some companies are looking at alternative compostable packaging materials. o Source reduction is the key. Not sure if can add to this ordinance at this time.  How is this phasing timeline tied to landfill lifetime? o Haven’t finished numbers, but key findings include if implemented all options would meet 2020 diversion rate goal. Our landfill has 10 years left. Likely that when it closes trash costs will go up significantly. Pay now or pay later. If less reliant on landfill, reduces impact, as well as delaying closure. Job creation aspect of recycling and reuse, GHG reductions, etc. Many metrics to analyze.  Is part of education component discussion about increased costs? o Yes. About ½ of residents live in multifamily housing. Want affordability for everyone. All subsidized affordable housing in Fort Collins already has recycling, so does not preclude affordability.  Volume and audience of outreach? o Multifamily groups, business groups, four public meetings. Public meetings were not well attended but had spikes in questionnaire results close to the meetings. Created a video to generate more activity. o Summary of feedback?  Open ended intentionally. Questions have included what you like, what to keep or add, etc. A lot of interest in organics collection as well as having recycling at businesses and apartment complexes. New survey asks about options. Page 9 MINUTES: CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD Date: Monday, September 21, 2015 Location: Community Room, 215 N. Mason Street Time: 5:30–8:00pm Board Members Present Board Members Absent Robert Kirkpatrick John Shenot, Chair Rich Fisher Jim Dennison Gregory Miller Tom Griggs Mark Houdashelt Vara Vissa (arrived 6:35) AGENDA ITEM 1: Community Recycling Ordinance Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Planner, presented information about the process to update the Community Recycling Ordinance, status of the project, and options under consideration. Pay-As-You-Throw ordinance began in 1995, which was innovative at the time and has become a best practice to drive recycling. It has been updated several times since. This project will update and expand the ordinance. In 1999 set a 50% diversion rate; met and surpassed this goal. Have since implemented electronic waste and cardboard landfill bans. New goal includes 75% diversion by 2020. At 65% now. Longer term goal of zero waste. Road to Zero Waste was adopted in 2013. Bans are enforced primarily through education. Haulers can refuse loads that clearly have cardboard or electronics. Complaints are followed up on by staff. Role of City is education and policy, as hauling is done by private companies. WRAP is program targeted to multifamily and business community that includes incentives and rebates, and Pay-As-You-Throw ordinance has only applied to single-family residential to date. With Pay-As-You-Throw recycling is bundled with trash service and pricing is based on volume of trash can subscribed to, with a 100% price increment between sizes. Multifamily and commercial currently have separate recycling service. 95% of single-family homes, 68% of multifamily, and 48% of commercial have recycling service. Staff is working with consulting company that has compiled case studies, has done significant public outreach, is creating recommendations, and will go to Work Session October 13. Draft options include short-, mid-, and long-term changes. Discussing reducing rate incline to 80% (offsetting increase in rates due to adding services), adding yard waste service for single-family, bundling recycling with trash for multifamily and commercial, phasing in organics collection, eventually expanding bans to include all curbside recyclables and organics, etc. Organics in landfill generate methane, so composting is beneficial to air quality and GHG reduction. Another idea is to reduce collection of trash to once every two weeks since organics would be collected once a week. As divert additional waste, can reduce trash service, which also offsets price changes. There are significant GHG reductions associated with recyclables and organics diversion. Comments/Q&A  Is City considering dividing city into districts for haulers? o Not as part of this project and not in near future. Last brought up in 2010.  What is distinction between single-family and multifamily? o If each unit has its own cart, they are considered single-family homes. If the location has a dumpster that multiple units share, it is considered multifamily. Different types/sizes of trucks that service different types of containers. Multifamily and commercial tend to have big metal dumpsters so they are categorized together.  If multifamily or commercial don’t have recycling, and still have to recycle cardboard, do they have to self-haul? o Yes. The cardboard ordinance increased recycling rates of multifamily and commercial and drop offs at the recycling center. However, many may still be putting in trash. o Commercial is biggest user of cardboard. Page 10  Explain rate incline changes. o Ex: If add organics and keep 100% incline, prices go up significantly. If have a lower incline, such as 80%, keep largest can size price from being prohibitive. Also, data shows 80% incline maintains optimal diversion.  Would composting be done by the City? o City does not have a facility. However, A1 Organics has yard waste recycling that was recently permitted to add food scraps. Also, largest biodigester was just completed outside of Greeley. Processes liquid waste from Laprino cheese factory and feed lots. Will also accept all food waste. Microbes generate methane, which is captured and used as natural gas. Waste is turned into compost. Would make sense to create a transfer station to get organics to a large scale facility. If create ordinance about organics the private sector will likely provide the facilities.  How are haulers reacting to proposed changes? o Staff has been in constant communication with haulers. Parts that all support. Mixing together options that meet all needs. All options are feasible for haulers, but would have a phase-in period. This allows them to work with customers, purchase and distribute new bins, change routes, etc. Also considered requiring recycling, but with no set service level. Found in research that commercial tends to low-ball how much recycling they needed when determining own service.  Fort Collins will make a bigger dent in GHG reduction with source reduction of packaging. o Pay-As-You-Throw system somewhat drives source reduction. Ex: Paying to throw away grass clippings, or leave them on the ground? Consumer will likely choose to leave them. Extended producer responsibility is a way to reduce packaging. This ordinance will not address this, but it is being worked on elsewhere. o The GHG figures are annual or projected total over time?  Annual. 2014 baseline.  What is percentage of overall GHG emissions?  If achieved, fairly high percent of estimated reductions. About a quarter to a third of 2020 reduction goal. o Credit counting: Some do backyard composting. Can that be estimated?  City supports backyard composting. Two benefits from full scale composting: 1. Even with excellent education program can only get about 5% of single-family to compost at home. 2. Commercial scale can take more materials than can put in backyard, including meat, oils, food- soiled paper products, etc. o What is City doing in waste reduction?  Very difficult. Communities that adopt Pay-As-You-Throw have 6% reduction in trash. When have to pay per unit of trash, people start to make different choices. Only quantifiable thing in our current programing.  Have had educational programs including ways to get off junk mail lists.  Plastic bag ordinance would have been source reduction project as well.  2014 community GHG inventory, solid waste was 70K tons. o Landfill collects methane and flares it?  Two landfills: Larimer County and Ault. Larimer County has methane capture that is flared. Ault has no methane capture system. City requests destination of materials from haulers. Broader debate on how much methane actually gets captured in the process.  Lucinda will get more data about what is flared at landfill and algorithm that calculates net emissions and provide to board.  Is City considering composting versus biodigesters? o Separated food waste would go to biodigester and yard waste mixed with food waste would go to composting. Page 11  Gap in organics collection for multifamily. Also, does collection create a reverse incentive for grocery stores to divert food to biodigester that would otherwise go to Food Bank? o Will figure out organics collection process in other sectors, then move toward adding multifamily. Single- family is fairly uniform as are food scraps from large generators. Groceries would have to pay to have organics collected. Hierarchy is to prevent food waste, feed people, feed animals, then compost.  EPA is pushing to reduce food waste. Has food recovery challenge.  USDA also. o Multifamily could have pilot projects down the line?  Yes. Certainly.  Will City have cooperative agreement with biodigester for biogas? o Doubt that. Biodigester financed by Sacramento Municipal Utility District which receives all the credits for the natural gas.  Alliance of some sort that could be established between cities, or in the state, aimed at directing food to Food Banks, schools, etc. Worked with Grant Family Farms. A lot of waste in the field. When go to grocery store pick the very best. In field only pick top produce, then wholesaler, then retailer, so a lot of waste in the chain. Had gleaning from churches that take to the Food Bank.  What does Caroline need from board? o Recommendation could come between Work Session and adoption. o Could happen at either time, depending on how strongly the board wants to give input before Work Session. Summary of feedback will be part of Work Session materials.  Changes in recycling market? o Huge shift in business model with dip in recycling prices globally. Haulers are paying to drop off recyclables now, whereas last year they were being paid for recyclables. Talking about modification to existing business structure. Haulers are trying to plan for next year, including rates. o Organics would become revenue stream for haulers?  Expertise is in hauling materials. Need to cover costs and profit percentage from any services they provide. Details include timing of infrastructure investment, staffing, trucks, containers, etc.  Multifamily sometimes has large commercial kitchens. Ex: senior housing. o Cafeterias involved with multifamily could be included with large food waste producers.  Don’t have multifamily organics currently listed because it is trickier. Multifamily we are discussing are ones that do not have commercial kitchens. Important, but working out system with other locations first. o Centralized kitchens can be part of pilot programs.  Doubt there are many multifamily that have unified kitchens.  Fort Collins has many retirement facilities.  May technically fall into category of business. Can make sure definition includes these.  Besides GHG, also about restoring soil. Organics recovery to produce food. Multiple benefits.  Where can compost be used? o Permitting is very strict. If compostable materials are created and used in one place, the regulations are not as strict. Board unanimously passed the following motion: The Air Quality Advisory Board recommends adoption of the Community Recycling Ordinance with current proposed options and is encouraged by the significant Green House Gas reductions that would be actualized with its implementation. The board supports inclusion of pilot projects for recycling of organic materials from multifamily. The board encourages approval of the ordinance as soon as possible, as it will aid the City in reaching its stated Climate Action Plan goals and organics recovery for food production. ATTACHMENT 10 1 Community Recycling Ordinance Caroline Mitchell 10-13-15 ATTACHMENT 11 Questions for Council Does Council have direction regarding options and timeline for 1) Updating the price differential for trash at single-family homes? 2) Recycling at multi-family complexes and businesses? 3) Organics collection options for single-family homes and grocers / large restaurants? 2014 Recycling and Composting in Fort Collins 3 Recycling Composting Trash 65% Diversion Recycling and Composting with Full Community Recycling Ordinance Implementation Recycled Composed Landfilled 80% Diversion 4 Alignment of Project 5 Plan Fort Collins: Principles ENV 13, 14, 15, 17 Strategic Plan: 4.6, 4.11: Demonstrate progress toward achieving zero waste within the community and the City organization BFO metrics: ENV 7, 10, 12 City Council-Adopted Goals: zero waste by 2030 Community Recycling Ordinance project Why recycling? • Conserve natural resources, prevent pollution • Greenhouse gas reductions from recycling or composting • Jobs creation, local economic growth • Extend life of landfill • Larimer County Landfill has 10 year life expectancy • Supports Council-adopted goals • Working toward zero waste goal • Climate Action Plan goals 6 Timeline of recycling in Fort Collins 7 Pay-As-You Throw (PAYT) starts 1995 PAYT updates 2004 2007 2013 2015 electronics landfill ban 2009 cardboard landfill ban 1999 Community Recycling Ordinance Road to Zero Waste plan goal: 50% diversion by 2010 Goal: 75% diversion by 2020 8 1) Trash and recycling service and rates are bundled • Recycling is no additional charge 2) Trash pricing based on volume of trash can subscription $30 *Rates are for example. Actual rates set by haulers. Current Pay-As-You-Throw Requirements $45 $15 9 Commercial / Multi-Family Trash System Same as single-family homes: • Volume-based pricing for trash • Bill based on size of dumpster, service frequency Different than single-family homes: • Recycling is separate fee, NOT bundled 10 Results of programs 95% 68% 48% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Single Family Homes Multi-Family Complexes Commercial 2014 Recycling Subscription Rate, Fort Collins (% of customers subscribed to recycling service) 11 Increased Recycling or Composting Greenhouse Gas Impact Estimated Cost Impact 1a) 80% price difference between trash can sizes (recommended option 1a) No change from current system No change from current system Cost savings for 64- and 96-gallon customers. Helps to reduce impacts to these customers from higher rates for additional services. 1b) 50% price difference between trash can sizes (alternative option 1b) Less diversion than current system Potential increase More significant cost savings for 64- and 96-gallon customers. Helps to reduce impacts to these customers from higher rates for additional services. Single-Family Options 12 Increased Recycling or Composting Greenhouse Gas Impact Estimated Cost 2a) Bundling trash & recycling service (recommended option) 15,000 tons 3.5% diversion rate increase Reduces 47,645 tons CO2 equivalent Additional 33% to 50% cost / customer (for those not already recycling) 2b) Requiring recycling service (alternative option) 2,281 tons 0.6% diversion rate increase Reduces 7,188 tons CO2 equivalent Additional 5-30% cost / customer ($20-$30/customer) (for those not already recycling) Multi-family & Commercial Options 13 Increased Recycling or Composting Greenhouse Gas Impact Estimated Cost 3) Require haulers to provide optional yard trimmings collection from all single-family homes (2016) 413 tons 0.1% diversion rate increase minor $13-15 / subscriber (optional) 4) Collect all-organics from all single-family homes (bundled) (2017 or 2018) 23,723 tons 5.4% diversion rate increase Reduces 10,080 tons CO2 equivalent $8 / household 5) Require food scraps subscription from grocers & large restaurants (2017 or 2018) 24,976 tons 6% diversion rate increase Reduces 24,889 tons CO2 equivalent Variable Recommended Organics Programs Creation of the Community Recycling Ordinance • 4 public meetings • Presentations to 5 City Boards & Commissions • Regular meetings with trash haulers • Presentations to 14 Stakeholder & Community Groups • Advisory board with 20 diverse members 14 15 single-family Homes Multi-Family Units Businesses Short term: Adjust Pay-As- You-Throw (2016-2017) • 80% price difference between sizes of trash carts* • All haulers offer option of weekly yard trimmings collection (for separate charge) Bundle recycling in with trash service Bundle recycling in with trash service Medium term: Collect organics (2017 – 2018) Phase in collection of organics (bundled with trash service) Require collection of food scraps from grocers, large restaurants Recommended Options for Community Recycling Ordinance 16 Alternative Options for Community Recycling Ordinance single-family Homes Multi-Family Units Businesses Short term: Adjust Pay-As- You-Throw (2016-2017) 50% price difference between sizes of trash carts* Require recycling service • Separate fee on bill • Hauler / customer determine amount of recycling Require recycling service • Separate fee on bill • Hauler / customer determine amount of recycling Longer term: Ban materials from landfill disposal (2019 – 2020) • Landfill ban on all curbside recyclables • Landfill ban on all organics • Every other week trash collection Landfill ban on all curbside recyclables • Landfill ban on all curbside recyclables • Landfill ban on all organics Current Recycling Programs in Fort Collins Education Incentive Mandate single-family residential General recycling education Pay-As-You-Throw ordinance Landfill ban on cardboard and electronics Businesses General recycling education Free waste audit, educational materials (WRAP) In-person outreach campaign (WRAP) Rebate for starting recycling (up to $500) (WRAP) Landfill ban on cardboard and electronics Apartments and condos General recycling education Free waste audit, educational materials (WRAP) Rebate for starting recycling (up to $500) (WRAP) Landfill ban on cardboard and electronics • Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor posts • Videos from public meetings Broadcast Outreach • Project email list • 500+ subscribed • Newsletters • Postcards handed out • Flyers posted in community • Press releases • News articles • Utility bill mailer (City News) •fcgov.com ATTACHMENT 6 established) (~2019 – 2020)  Landfill ban on all curbside recyclables  Landfill ban on all organics (food scraps, food soiled paper and yard trimmings)  Every other week trash collection  Landfill ban on all curbside recyclables  Landfill ban on all curbside recyclables  Landfill ban on all organics ATTACHMENT 3 3.5% diversion rate increase Reduces 55,000 tons CO2 equivalent Additional 33% to 50% cost / customer (for those not already recycling) Would include process to opt-out if location can’t recycle. 2b: Multi-family / commercial requiring recycling service (alternative option) 2,300 tons 0.6% diversion rate increase Reduces 8,300 tons CO2 equivalent Additional 5-30% cost / customer ($20-$30/customer) (for those not already recycling) Minimal recycling level subscription has occurred elsewhere; could result in nominal impact. Would include process to opt-out if location can’t recycle. 3: Require haulers to provide optional yard trimmings collection from all single-family homes 400 tons 0.1% diversion rate increase minor $13-15 / subscriber (optional) First step to providing all organics service. Allows customers who are ready to start composting yard trimmings to participate sooner. 4: Collect all-organics from all single-family homes (bundled) 23,700 tons 5.4% diversion rate increase Reduces 14,800 tons CO2 equivalent $8 / household Includes yard trimmings, food scraps, paper towels etc. would be year-round. Bundled with trash service. 5: Require food scraps subscription from grocers & large restaurants 25,000 tons 6% diversion rate increase Reduces 29,900 tons CO2 equivalent Variable Costs for service will decrease with more customer density for haulers. ATTACHMENT 1