Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07121988 - S.6 To: �''• BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: Supervisor Tom Torlakson Costa DATE: County July 12 , 1988 SUBJECT: ROLE OF RECYCLING. IN WASTE MANAGEMENT ISSUES SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer the letter, dated May 24 , 1988, from Charles Papke, President of Resource Management Associates, on recycling issues to the Solid Waste Commission, the Internal Operations Committee, the Community Development Department, and County Counsel, particularly for a response to the "control of waste stream issue" (as discussed in the last paragraph of page one) . BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Please refer to attached for additional background information. TT:gro CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON July 12, 1988 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT — ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERV;atcheS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Solid Waste Commission, via CDD ATTESTED._ 1R 9 Internal operations Committee ,Clerk of the Board 0 Community Development Supervisors and County Administrator County Counsel County Administrator M382/7-98 BY464AO-*4446-) DEPUTY Ktl:tiVLLj O' y Cly PESOURCE MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES MATERIALS RECOVERY & RECYCLING SPECIALISTS QMA May 24 , 1988 Tom Torlakson Supervisor, District Five 300 East Leland Rd. Suite 100 Pittsburg, CA 94565 v Dear Mr, orlakson: Thank you for the copies of your letters that I received today to the cities of Brentwood and Antioch. I wasn' t aware that these issues were being raised and I hope that your letters will generate further thought and consideration of the role of recycling in waste management issues . A few comments about some of these issues . Franchise agreements and recycling. This issue has been raised several times in the past few months in cities served by Central Sanitary District ( Pacheco, Lafayette and Moraga ) , Walnut Creek and Concord. The issue arises when cities that have franchise agreements with private haulers wish to initiate curbside recycling programs. Since ownership of garbage and responsibility for recycling are not clearly stated in existing agreements , these questions must be resolved through negotiation. So far these discussions have been difficult to resolve in most cases , and as such, they have forced delays and raise barriers to starting new recycling programs . One suggestion I have is for the County to seek a legal opinion regarding this issue that would help cities decide what they need to do to move forward with recycling. The opinion would be based on previous cases , the California Attorney General' s decision (about 10 years ago) , and survey of other cities that have overcome this barrier. With a well-studied opinion, cities could feel more confident in deciding what risk, if any, would be involved in beginning new programs . 2209 Jefferson Street Napa, CA 94559 (707) 257-8630 Variable can rates. Many cities in the County already have variable can garbage rates, some of which have incremental increases per can larger than actual cost . While this rate system provides an incentive to reduce waste and to recycle , there really have not been any studies to verify the degree of correlation. Nevertheless, some cities such as Livermore , set a rate charge .on the second and third cans that includes a fee to off-set the costs of their curbside recycling programs . In addition, more cities around the country are adopting a "metered" collection fee system where residents buy stickers or bags that include the disposal cost and only use them when they have saved enough garbage . In this way people pay only for what they dispose of, and are encouraged even more to reduce waste and- recycle . In fact , some cities , such as Grand Rapids , Michigan, "sell" two types of bags - one for garbate ( costing about $1 ,50 each) and one for recyclables which is free. It puzzles me that this "metered tag" system, which saves considerable sums because it requires no bookkeeping or billing costs , is not more widespread. Automated collection. Related to this issue is the impact of new garbage collection technologies on recycling participation. Two forms; automated, which uses mechanical arms to empty large garbage cans into the truck, and semi-automated which requires some manual assistance, are spreading rapidly around the country. In one case , Olympia, Washington recently switched to semi-automated collection, but before it started, they carefully studied how to integrate the new collection system with curbside recycling. It is clear that by providing large , 90 gallon, containers to residents , there will be less incentive to reduce waste and recycle more. Large cans also eliminate the effectiveness of variable can rates for most users , unless three sizes ( 30, 60, and 90 gal) are made available The County may wish to adopt some policy decisions regarding these issues to encourage cities to set garbage collection rates and mechanisms that foster recycling and waste reduction. East County Recycling Plant. Again, I 'm glad to hear of interest to build a materials processing facility in the east county area. Funding, of course , is an important element , and the possible use of a "tax increment fund" for this purpose sounds interesting. I'm not aware of this fund and would like to learn more about it . Page 2 Also, if you or the cities involved would like some help in developing some of the costs of the facility, I can offer our experience in the area. I would be glad to discuss any of these issues in further detail, should you wish to do so. Again, thanks for the information. It sounds like that trip to San Jose started some wheels a-rolling. Maybe we should try to get more officials on the next tour. Since el C rles Papke resident CP/dj CC: Dave Okita, CC County Page 3