Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 Mandating Recycle ParticipationG~~~ OF Dp~~`2 ~ '9`~-~~~z ~ ~ % ~4LIFOR~~ STAFFREPORT CITY CLERK DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL File #^~ 1^^0 -~~ DATE: March 15, 2011 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Joni L. Pattillo, City Manager SUBJE . Report on Feasibility Study for Mandating Recycling Participation Prepared By: Martha Aja, Environmental Specialist EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Goal & Objective directs Staff to explore the feasibility of an ordinance that would encourage existing and future commercial locations to provide recycling services. Such an ordinance would only apply to commercial businesses and multi-family complexes that have adequate enclosure space. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There would be a financial impact associated with the preparation of an ordinance. The Fiscal Year 2010/2011 budget allocated 25 hours of legal time for this Goal & Objective. To date, the City Attorney's Office has billed 7.5 hours of legal review. It is anticipated that the remaining budget (17.5 hours) is adequate to cover the legal review of an ordinance. Staff time would also be required to prepare an ordinance. It is estimated that approximately 10 - 20 hours of Staff time would be spent on the preparation of an ordinance. ~ RECOMMENDATION: Staff is requesting that the City Council provide feedback and direction on developing a recycling ordinance that requires multi-family residential locations to provide recycling bins if there is adequate space in the trash enclosure. Submitted B ~ ' wed y: Senior Administrative Analyst Assistant ~ anager Page 1 of 4 ~~~~ ~~. g' L-- DESCRIPTION: Background A Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Goal & Objective (Goal No. I-F-2) directs Staff to explore the feasibility of an ordinance that would encourage existing antl future commercial locations to provide recycling services to its tenants and/or residents. Staff has worked with the City Attorney on the legality of this issue and, the City Attorney has concluded that the City may regulate recycling and require commercial businesses, which includes multi-family complexes with 5 or more units, to provide recycling bins if there is available space in the trash enclosure. In recent years, the City has worked with its Franchise Hauler, Amador Valley Industries (AVI), to increase the commercial diversion rate within the City. Diversion simply refers to the rate at which solid waste is "diverted" from the landfill and into the City's recycling and composting programs. In 2006, the commercial diversion rate was 12.9%. The commercial diversion rate has been steadily increasing since that time; in 2010, the City's commercial diversion rate was 23%. These numbers are franchise diversion and do not include construcfion and demolition debris (C&D) hauling, roll-off service by AVI (used by some businesses and residents), self-haul or other haulers used by businesses in the City. While Staff does not have data for self-haul or for other haulers used, a blending of the diversion data for C&D and roll-off services with commercial data would yield a diversion rate of 45%. In recent years, several cities have adopted voluntary and mandatory recycling ordinances as a means to increase diversion rates, reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A voluntary ordinance could be as simple as mandatory subscription, where residents and businesses are required to pay for the cost of recycling whether or not they actually use the service, which is currently the case within Dublin, and they continue along a spectrum of more stringent regulations up to a mandate to recycle, where residents and businesses are prohibited from pfacing recyclable materials within a trash container. The commercial sector, which is a large generator of solid waste, has been identified as a key greenhouse gas contributor and is often a focus of such ordinances. Dublin Currently, the City of Dublin does not require that recycling bins be provided at commercial businesses and multi-family complexes. There have been a few instances where apartment complex property managers have refused to provide recycling bins, and the City has received complaints from the residents at these complexes. As previously.noted, the City Attorney has determined that it is feasible to develop an ordinance that requires commercial businesses and multi-family complexes to provide recycling services. As part of the feasibility study, City Staff spoke with AVI Staff to discuss potential obstacles with requiring commercial~ businesses and/or multi-family complexes to provide recycling services. The majority of commercial businesses that are not providing recycling services are locat~d in multi-tenant complexes. In situations where there is not buy-in from a property owner or commercial business to provide recycling, the placement of recycling bins in the enclosure will not necessarily achieve the desired diversion results. In order for a recycling program at a commercial business to be successful, there must .be infrastructure in place (i.e., in-house containers for tenants to place their recyclables within). Alsb, in an office situation, a custodial staff that is informed and keeps the recyclables separate from the waste stream is required. The infrastructure must exist within a business in order for recycling bins within. an enclosure to achieve the desired result of reducing the waste stream. An indifferent business who chooses not to recycle will not have the necessary infrastructure in place, and, therefore, a recycling bin Page 2 bf 4 within an enclosure will most likely get filled with garbage instead of recyclables. The placement of garbage in a recycling bin is problematic because of contamination issues. Contamination occurs when recyclables are not disposed of properly; for example, contamination 'refers to an item that should have been placed in the garbage but was placed in the recycling bin instead. Mixing garbage and recycling can increase AVI's cost of recycling, and, therefore, AVI will not collect contaminated recycling bins. In instances where gacbage is put within a recycling bin, the businesses' garbage bill would increase to pay for increased garbage service. Based upon discussions with AVI Staff, City Staff determined that at this time it is not feasible to require commercial businesses to provide recycling services due to the issues outlined above. These issues do not apply to the multi-family complexes. Staff has identified two different approaches that fhe City can take. These approaches, in - addition to how they would be implemented, are discussed below. 1. Maintain the status quo of not requiring commercial businesses and multi-familv complexes to provide recycling services. Under this . approach, commercial businesses and multi-family complexes would be encouraged to provide recycling services; fiowever, commercial businesses and/or multi- family complexes would have the ability to decline the service if they so choose. AVI would continue their annual business audits and, as a part of these audits, would strongly encourage those commercial businesses and multi-famify complexes that have space to provide recycling to their tenants/residents. 2. Require that a recvclinq bin be provided at multi-family complexes in instances where there is adequate space. This approach requires that multi-family complexes give their residents the opportunity to recycle; however, it does not force individuals to recycle. No city in Alameda County currently requires multi-family complexes to provide recycling if there is adequate space within the enclosure. Of the 29 multi-family complexes in Dublin, AVI has identified 3 multi-family complexes that have adequate space within their enclosure but do not provide recycling. The City has received calls from residents at these complexes who have requested recycling services at their apartment complex. Under such an approach, multi-family complexes would be required to allow AVI to provide recycling bins at no cost to the multi-family complex. The cost of recycling for multi-family complexes is included in the cost of service. The decision to recycle would be left up to the individual residents. Since this is not a mandatory recycling ordinance, there would be no fines. levied if residents do not put recyclables in the recycling bins. In FY 08/09, the City of Dublin received a grant from StopWaste ~o provide bags to store recyclables to all multi-family complexes within the City; therefore, the infrastructure is in place for the residents at these complexes to collect their recyclables and then put them ~ in the recycling bin within the trash enclosure. The ordinance could have some costs impacts to the apartment complex resulting from educating residents on the items that can be placed in the recycling bin. The City and AVI would work with the apartment complexes to assist in the education component. AVI provides free technical assistance to businesses to help them overcome any obstacles that they may encounter. Generally, this creates issues for the property manager as helshe must work with his or her residents to ensure that there is understanding of what items should be recycled and what items should not. Page 3 of 4 In implementing the ordinance, Staff would work with AVI on the three multi-family complexes with adequate space for recycling. Any proposed ordinance would only require the multi-family complexes, which have adequate space within their garbage enclosure, to provide recycling. The City would work with AVI to ensure that all feasible sites have recycling. For those sites that do not have adequate space, the customer would receive an exemption. ~ There would be a financial impact associated with this option, which would include legal expenses to review any ordinance in addition to staff time. The Fiscal Year 2010/2011 budget allocated 25 hou'rs of legal time for this Goal & Objective. To date, the City Attorney's Office has billed 7.5 hours of legal review. It is anticipated that the remaining budget (17.5 hours) will be sufficient. The selection of this option could be accomplished within current staffing resources. Mandatory Recycling Efforts At the February 15, 2011 City Council meeting, the topic of mandatory recycling was raised. Staff has included a discussion below on what is occurring at the state level to provide more information on this issue. . The State of California is currently working on the development of a Mandatory Commercial Recycling Measure, as required by the California Air Resources Board's Scoping Plan. The Scoping Plan contains a variety of ineasures to achieve the required greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions required by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (commonly referred to as AB 32). The commercial recycling measure focuses on increasing commercial waste diversion within California to achieve a reduction in GHG emissions of 5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. In coordination with the Air Resources Board, CalRecycle has held several informal stakeholder workshops on Mandatory Commercial Recycling Regulations. It is projected that the Air Resources Board will hold a hearing in spring 2011 to consider the adoption of the Mandatory Commercial Recycling Regulations with the proposed January 1, 2012 effective date of the regulations, if they are adopted. The State's proposed Mandatory Commercial Recycling Regulations would apply fo businesses and multi-family residential dwellings of 5 units or more that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste and recyclables per week. If the State adopts Mandatory Cammercial Recycling Regulations, the City of Dublin would comply with those requirements at that time. Staff will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates as appropriate. Staff requests that the City Council provide feedback and direction on the development of a recycling participation ordinance. NOTICING REQUIREMENTSIPUBLIC OUTREACH: Not Applicable. ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 4 of 4