HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Read Before Packet - 2/12/2013 (10)- -
CI
Environmental Services Department
215 North Mason
Of
Fort
Collins
PO B0
Fort Collins. CO 80522
970.221.6
970.224.6.6177177 Fax
/caov. com/environmentalsemices
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Weitkunat and City Councilmembers
FROM: Susie Gordon. Sr. Environmental Planner
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager i��-
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director LP-Y
DATE: February 12, 2013
SUBJECT: Adjourned Meeting Feb. 12 - Regarding Agenda Item # 3; Amending the City
Code to Prohibit Disposal of Cardboard in the Community's Waste Stream
The following clarifications are provided by staff for Council's information concerning proposed
Ordinance # 23-2013, which would restrict the disposal of cardboard in Fort Collins' waste
stream.
1. Violation of the cardboard ban by generators (owner or occupants of residential,
multifamily, commercial and industrial facilities) is proposed to be a civil, not a criminal
infraction. This is following the recent trend to decriminalize elements of the Municipal
Code such as animal control and nuisance issues.
2. However, violation of the e-waste ban remains as a criminal violation, in light of the fact
that it also violates state law (effective July 1, 2013) and involves the prohibited disposal
of hazardous materials.
3. The word "person" is defined in Section 1-2 of the City Code, as follows:
Person. The word person shall extend and be applied to individuals, corporations,
associations, firms, joint ventures, estates, trusts, business trusts, syndicates,
fiduciaries, partnerships and bodies politic and corporate and all other groups and
combinations.
Attachments
1. List of Concerns received from the community about cardboard disposal ordinance
proposal, with brief staff responses.
2. Air Quality Advisory Board - draft minutes (excerpted) from January 28, 2013 meeting
Attachment 1
Concerns Raised Regarding Cardboard Ordinance, and
Staff Responses (based on experience administering the City's New Waste Reduction & Recycling Assistance Program)
Concern
Staff Response
Cost to business and multi-
While recycling service is an additional charge, many customers find that they can reduce
family customers for
the size of their trash bin or the frequency of trash service once recyclables are removed
additional recycling service
from the trash bin. If the trash bin is regularly >25%full of cardboard, the amount of
recyclables removed is likely to be significant enough to yield savings in the trash service
portion of a customer's bill. Clients enrolled in the WRAP program have found that starting
recycling has resulted in a lower trash bill overall (in one case, for a housing/care facility,
the price for trash service dropped $160/month), Staff also hears about lowered trash bills
that are self -reported by participants in the ClimateWise program who initiate or enhance
their recycling.
Space restrictions make
This is certainly a situation for a number of locations, which staff has encountered
adding a recycling bin
working with WRAP and ClimateWise participants. We will apply the same one-on-one
difficult
customer service to help businesses and MFU managers find solutions to relieve space -
constraint issues, including: downsizing trash bins to make space for recycling; sharing
service with adjoining locations; and, using a baler or compactor shared with other
locations. The WRAP program currently offers rebates for businesses and MFU's to rebate
the costs of starting a new recycling program, which will be applicable to new -to -
cardboard -recycling applicants as well. Staff also plans to make financial assistance
available for locations needing to make modifications such as enlarging an enclosure, in
addition to the existing rebates available for starting recycling service.
Property owners concerned
The ordinance uses the same method for enforcement as many of the City's nuisance
about liability for tenants'
codes, and having the owner/occupant liable is consistent with other Code provisions.
actions
This approach gives flexibility to direct enforcement action to the party who is
responsible. Education and assistance will be provided extensively prior to any
consideration of citations.
More educational programs
The City has been conducting recycling education programs and building recycling
could be offered instead of
infrastructure for the past 20 years. A brief summary:
regulatory action
1995 — Council goals include reduce by 35%the amount of paper wasted by commercial customers;
increase participation in commercial recycling to 50%.
1996 - Pay -As -You -Throw (PAYT) ordinance goes into effect; requires recycling be provided with
trash service for no charge for single family home residents
1996 - Recyclone Times' recycling education newsletter published twice a year through 2007
1998 - Web -site development with extensive links to recycling options, information
1998 - New goal adopted: recycle or compost 35% of the waste stream by 2004, and 50% by 2010
2002 - 04 -
• Rivendell Recycling Drop -Off Center opens (still in operation)
• Equal Space" ordinance passed requiring all new commercial and multi -family buildings
to design trash enclosures with as much space for recycling as trash
• Outreach campaign to multifamily recycling complexes
2005 - Cardboard accepted in curbside recycling (7 years ago)
2007-Single Stream recycling comes to Fort Collins (making it easier)
2011
• "I Recycle" educational / recycling promotion campaign starts (continues today)
• Additional planning staff (.5 FTE) hired to focus on multi -family and commercial recycling
• WRAP (Waste Reduction & Recycling Assistance Program) initiated to assist commercial
and multi -family
2012 -Green Building Code requires construction sites to recycle cardboard, wood, metals, and
aggregates
- Excerpted Minutes (DRAFT) -
AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 2013
DATE: Monday, January 28, 2013
LOCATION: 215 N. Mason Conference Room 1-A
TIME: 5:30 — 8:30 pm
For Reference Greg McMaster, Chair - 484-:
Ben Manvel, Council Liaison - 217-
Mclissa Hovey, Staff Liaison — 22I'
Present: Scott Green, David Dietrich, Greg
Shenot, Jim Dennison, Rich Fisher, Tom Moi
Absent: none
Staff present: Alexis Hmielak, Melissa Hovey,
Guests: Bob Prohaska, Pranaya
Cardboard Recycling Ordinance;
Air
Discussion:
• Greg McMaster:
ordinance in Dec
ki
Attachment 2
Nancy York, John
the following comments
recommendation supporting this cardboard
follow up with another recommendation that
• Nancy York:—Will,the haulers(a'lert renters that are%not in compliance with the ordinance?
(Tlie haulers will not pick up t ash with more t&n 25% cardboard in it. However, they will
still`bill'the client for the trash truck visit because they made the effort to pick it up. The
client willprobably workvit out with the hauler to be sure their trash is picked up on a regular
basis.) v
• Jim Dennison: Will the haulers comply with not picking up over 25%? One suggestion
would be to drive around and look at trash to see if it is not in compliance and call the
haulers. (This is about,the relationship between the hauler and customer. Also, haulers have
a license with the Citty,that,th�ey do not want to risk losing by not complying with the
ordinance. Haulers also watch each other's performance.)
• Jim Dennison: If recycling cardboard saves money, why does it cost to recycle? (We have
recent information from 80 mid to large apartment complexes that indicate 80% of them
already have recycling programs).
• Michael Lynn: How close and how fast will this ordinance take us to the goal of 50%? (In
2011, we were almost at 50% but a portion of that diverted waste was from shredding trees
from the unexpected snow storm. We do not have all data yet for 2012, but we expect the
diversion rate will go down. We feel this cardboard ordinance will help get us up to 50%
diversion. To get higher than 50% diversion would probably include diversion of organics
because 35% of what is in landfill is organics.)
• Scott Green: Will the ordinance language say citizens "should or shall" comply? (Customers
"shall" comply. That language is not needed for haulers because we have an expectation
they will comply with the ordinance to keep their license with the City). ,
• John Shenot: I was on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee in Madison, Wisconsin. They
had a 65% diversion rate and a cardboard ordinance was an essential step to get there. There
are a lot of concerns when you change regulations. I think everything you presented I saw in
practice in Madison. I think that, through competition, some of these costs will disappear
over time. /�
• Rich Fisher: Where is the City on having a compost facility and what can we do to
encourage one? (Citizens in Fort Collins can currently use Clean Air Compost for curbside
collection of organics. Gallegos also has a yard waste program. The closest permitted food -
waste compost facility is A-1 Organics in Commerce �City. �They also have a facility in
Eaton. Composting is very labor intensive, not all -that profitable, and hard to get permitted.
Construction of a facility would probably cost several million dollar\sHageman's Earth
Cycle on Prospect currently takes organics, but,not food scraps.)
o Susie Gordon: Funding for the Integrated,Recycling,Facility (IRF) was approved in
the BFO process. We areKcurrentlyfinalizing,the location. The IRF\will collect yard
waste, but will then transfer it to a processing facility. I really do not think there is
any chance the City of Fort C•ollms'will have an active composting facility.
o Susie Gordon: Loveland, Larime County and Fort Collins share ownership of the
Latimer County -Landfill. Composting often comes up as part of that discussion.
• Jim Dennison: Something to consider is to, determine where the -City of Fort Collins wants to
be in 10 years and do'it all at•once. It is hard -on a community to piecemeal ordinances. (If
you can get people.to recycle cardboard, recycling of other material in the single -stream
system will follow.)\\ / \\
• Susie Gordon If.City Council passes this ordinance it will be the first one in Colorado and
• Greg McMaster: I suggest we,gi' e the minutes'of this meeting to Susie for her presentation
to Council and let our suggestion,be our discussion. The group agreed to this suggestion.
2