City of Lawrence                                         

Recycling and Resource Conservation Advisory Board

March 12, 2007 (5:30 PM) Meeting Minutes

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Chris Cobb, John Craft, Dickie Heckler, Sarah Hill-Nelson , Daniel Poull, Laura Routh, Marie Stockett, Brent Swain

 

MEMBERS ABSENT:

Jae Chang, Cindy Strecker

STAFF PRESENT:

Tammy Bennett, Dave Corliss, Michelle Crank, Celeste Fish, Tom Hogan, Kathy Richardson, Chuck Soules, Bob Yoos

 

GUESTS PRESENT:

 

 

PUBLIC PRESENT:

 

 

 

Information provided by Dave Corliss, City Manager, regarding processes:

- Departments send up agenda memos each week, with supporting materials.  Department agenda materials are due every Wednesday.

- The agenda is created on Thursday morning and then Corliss talks to the Mayor on Thursday afternoon. Finally the agenda get posted on the city’s website.

- If you want to highlight something on the agenda or brief the City Commission on a specific topic, work with department staff to include in department agenda memo.  

 

Comment: (Corliss) stated that there are 40 Advisory Boards in the City of Lawrence. The Advisory Boards speak through their minutes and their attachments.

 

Comment: (Corliss) stated that years ago all city Advisory Boards presented a short presentations at CC meetings. This took a total of 3 to 4 months. It is possible that new commissioners will want to ask for presentations again.

 

Question: (Routh) asked if RRCAB can request to be put on the CC agenda.

Answer: (Corliss) said yes but the mayor decides whether or not to place RRCAB on the agenda.

Question: (Hill-Nelson) asked if the request needs to go through staff.

Answer: (Corliss) said yes, it is important.

 

Comment: (Corliss) stated that Lawrence is getting at least one new commissioner and the 2008 Budget is being worked on. This is a great time to have RRCAB talk about recycling to CC. Tammy Bennett works on the budget in April for Public Works and by August the budget is adopted. The City Commission reviews the City Manger’s recommended budget and makes alterations as they deem appropriate.

 

Question: (Routh) asked how RRCAB goes about changing their name, ByLaws and Resolutions.

Answer: (Corliss) only the CC can change your Advisory Board name, ByLaws and Resolutions. Noted was City Code Chapter 1 Laws for establishing Advisory Boards.

Comment: (Bennett) stated she will work with RRCAB on the format of requesting changes to name, ByLaws and Resolutions and then she will place this on the CC agenda. Bennett will attend the next RRCAB meeting on March 15, 2007.

 

Question: (Routh) asked what the difference between an Advisory Board and a Commission is.

Answer: (Corliss) does not know what the technical difference is.

 

Question: (Heckler) asked what the obstacles for curbside recycling are.

Answer: (Corliss) said it depends on the priority the CC wants regarding recycling.

 

Comment: (Hill-Nelson) stated that RRCAB thought making curbside recycling an option on the city utility bill would increase recycling. The city could utilize the current private curbside recycling businesses and the city could purchase recycling collection containers in order to achieve a uniform look for curbside in Lawrence.

Comment: (Yoos) talked to Ed Mullins, city’s Finance Director and he said there will be many obstacles to include curbside recycling option and payment through city utility bills.

Comment: (Corliss) added that there may be some legal issues too. Corliss also stated “what are the costs?” and “what are the priorities?” Please note that the utility bill is getting very expensive.

 

Comment: (Swain) brought up point of cost analyses. Will it be cheaper if the city handled the curbside recycling as opposed to using the third parties? Swain also noted that RRCAB does not have the expertise to create these cost analyses.

Comment: (Corliss) added that RRCAB should work with staff on cost analysis and if staff can’t create the cost analysis then in the CC agrees the city could hire a consultant.

 

Question: (Routh) questioned if the Solid Waste Division’s would provide more up to date data. For example, big subtitle C landfill in Kansas City area is closed thus Hamm landfill will be taking more waste.

Answer: (Yoos) intends to update data in near future.

 

Question: (Poull) wonders when Legal Department will set a deadline for researching the suggestion to franchise areas of the city to these existing small businesses which collect recyclables curbside.

Answer: (Yoos) said RRCAB will have to ask Corliss.

 

Comment: (Yoos) informed that other city deadlines on Staff Response are being met. Updates: Mixed Paper Bin will be placed at Hy-Vee on 6th street soon. Staff is working on researching uniform recycling collection bins. Staff is also working on questions to ask curbside recycling businesses.

 

Comment: (Routh) stated that she wants curbside recycling businesses to be licensed.

 

Comment: (Hill-Nelson) mentioned that RRCAB called a few curbside recycling businesses (Jeff’s Curbside, Sunflower Curbside and Tree Hugger Recycling) and they are interested in growth and are willing to discuss further. These businesses said their rates could possibly go down if they had more business.

 

Comment: (Yoos) stated that the city could buy uniform collection bins (12 to 14 gallon) for curbside recycling participants in Lawrence. The curbside recycling businesses would distribute these to their clients. Yoos mentioned that the city needs to sit down and meet with the private curbside recycling businesses. Yoos stated that a few years ago curbside recycling business in Lawrence had about 400 clients and that it is probably more like 1700 clients now.

 

Comment: (Hill-Nelson) stated that we may be upsetting the curbside recycling businesses if they would have to lose some customers in certain areas of the city due to breaking up the city into sections. Hill-Nelson stated that these businesses were all in favor of having the curbside recycling option on the city’s utility bill and were in favor of uniform bins.

 

Comment: (Swain) stated that the curbside recycling businesses could place a sticker on the uniform container. Swain does not want businesses to lose their identity and logos.

Comment: (Bennett) suggested putting WRR website www.LawrenceRecycles.org on bins instead of just labeling the bins “Lawrence Recycles”. This will send people to source of information.

 

Comment: (Poull) mentioned that it would be bad if the city would take over recycling after a private/public partnership was formed.

Comment: (Yoos) stated that if the city takes over recycling it will be because of failure of private/public partnership and this would be communicated.

 

Question: (Routh) asked what if Wal-Mart Community Recycling Center closes. Routh believes the city needs to do some long term planning because we are currently dependent on Wal-Mart.

Answer: (Yoos) commented that this would require an expensive facility.

 

Comment: (Routh) stated that KDHE does not inspect recycling centers but that the state received many calls regarding the operations at 12th and Haskell Bargain Center. Routh said that it is well within the city’s right to inspect the recycling centers and to license these businesses.

Comment: (Heckler) added that he has heard that the neighbors of 12th and Haskell Bargain Center are always complaining about litter. There are also lots of complaints against Wal-Mart.

 

Question: (Hill-Nelson) asked what the next steps are.

Answer: (Bennett) mentioned looking over and reviewing the recycling memo and staff response.

Answer: (Routh) mentioned having a round table with curbside recycling businesses is necessary.

Answer: (Swain) stated that he sees it in two parts. First he would like RRCAB to focus on what they need to do to encourage the city to support the curbside recycling businesses. Secondly RRCAB needs to think about long range planning.

 

Comment: (Routh) stated that the city’s study report for curbside recycling was way off since the city did not account for material rise for a MRF.

Comment: (Yoos) clarified that the study was done with the assumption that people would not drop-off recyclables at the Wal-Mart Recycling Center.

Comment: (Routh) would like the city to take into account other recycling models.

 

Question: (Stockett) asked if it was feasible to turn glass into material (asphalt) used by the city.

Answer: (Yoos) stated that would need to be consulted with KDOT. Yoos stated that there needs to be a local market first.

 

Question: (Hill-Nelson) asked if Kansas was close to adopting the bottle bill.

Answer: (Yoos) stated that no one has brought it up to legislature. Yoos is a firm believer of the bottle bill and product stewardship. Yoos announced that the City of Lawrence has become a member of the Product Stewardship Institute.

 

Question: (Poull) asked if neighborhood recycling centers is a possibility.

Answer: (Yoos) stated that this is not a great idea. The city would consider placing city recycling bins (newspaper or cardboard) at a neighborhood site if there were adequate space.

 

Comment: (Routh) suggested having a Lawrence map with all the recycling drop-off points.

Comment: (Crank) informed that the city website has a GIS map.

 

Comment: (Yoos) mentioned city is researching electronic waste recycling. 

 

Meeting adjourned 8:30 p.m. Next meeting March 15th, 2007 at 5:30 p.m.

 

ATTACHMENT #A

 

 

1. To generate better recycling data, will the City consider conducting a waste sort of residential waste streams, and/or pursue more comprehensive solid waste planning efforts which provide data on population, demographics, waste generation trends and disposal capacity? (Bob indicated that he is working, internally, on waste stream and population analysis).

 

2. Will the city consider surveying residents as to their usage of current options, and interest in curbside recycling?

 

3. Targeted materials collected by drop-off presume, among other things, transportation, storage space and physical ability. What can the City do to accommodate those residents without cars, storage room or the physical strength/capacity to recycle?

 

4. Will the City pursue surveying as a method of assessing participation?

 

5. Can/will the City quantify the total number of residents currently participating in curbside? (The last estimate was ~400).

 

6. Can the city verify tonnages collected curbside? If the city cannot generate this number now, can this data requirement be part of any future licensure process? (This will hopefully included; see #7).

 

7. Through the proposed hauler "registration" process, what specific protections can we provide to ensure that haulers manage materials appropriately? (It is noted that the city already has generic authority through City code to license both recycling vendors and recycling centers. Litter, unlawful disposal and nuisance conditions were discussed)

 

8. Planned marketing was described to support current curbside businesses; What is the theme of these media messages? (Inserts were discussed). What is the timeline for their release? Has input been solicited from haulers? (This was suggested).

 

9. What was the legal service's department response regarding franchise areas? (We need to ask Dave Corliss this question).

 

10. In regard to Staff's updating of the 2004 feasibility study for a Materials Recycling Facility (MRF), will this assessment consider public-private partnerships or a larger waste shed than Lawrence? Does the City believe that Lawrence alone has the tonnages locally to justify a full blown MRF? (This was discussed, and LDR indicated that a broader scope analysis was needed before dismissing the MRF concept).

 

11. In regard to Neighborhood Centered Comprehensive Recycling Drop-Off Centers, can the City provide a map of current locations, and has an assessment been done to address underserved areas? (Yes, and yes. The current map may be in a big format, though. Staff may look further at options here).

 

12. In regard to additional drop box for mixed paper, how many boxes will be placed? (Boxes are being prepped. # and location TBA--6th street Hy-Vee is likely). When?

 

13. In regard to Pay As You Throw (PAYT), is the Staff's most recent response the City's final answer on PAYT? What formal assessment has been done to justify this? Many larger cities have alleyway collection and MFDs. Has research been done to look at how Cities comparable to Lawrence have implemented PAYT?

 

14. Will the City consider conducting formal research (or hiring in a consultant to further research this option) before dismissing PAYT?

 

15. Has an assessment been conducted on the viability of PAYT if implemented just for residential single family dwellings and or dwellings with less than 4 units? This is a common model for University towns.

 

16. What recent action has the City taken to promote a bottle bill? (This is a topic included on the City legislative wish lists, to no avail thus far).