Roseville Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission

Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, February 26, 2013 at 6:30 p.m.

1.            Introduction / Call Roll

Chair Jan Vanderwall called the meeting to order at approximately 6:30 p.m.

Members Present: Chair Jan Vanderwall; and Members Steve Gjerdingen; Joan Felice; and Jim DeBenedet

Members Excused:  Member Dwayne Stenlund

Staff Present:          Public Works Director Duane Schwartz

2.            Public Comments

None.

3.            Approval of January 22, 2013 Meeting Minutes

Member Gjerdingen moved, Member Felice seconded, approval of the January 22, 2013, meeting as amended.

Corrections:

Page 2, line 79 (DeBenedet)

·         Correct to watermain rather than sewer lining

Page 3, line 111 (DeBenedet)

·         Correct language to indicate pedestrian crossings at an intersection, rather than “roadway”

Page 5, lines 189-193 (DeBenedet/Schwartz)

·         Delete warranty information, as not applicable to this sanitary sewer lining project

Ayes: 4

Nays: 0

Motion carried.

4.            Communication Items

Public Works Director Schwartz noted that updates on various construction projects were included in tonight’s meeting packet and available on-line at the City’s website at www.cityofroseville.com/projects, and as detailed in the staff report dated February 22, 2013.

As a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof, Mr. Schwartz provided an “Executive Summary and Key Points” from a May 10, 2012 City of Minneapolis Dual Sort/Single Sort Collection Study.

Mr. Pratt noted a different vendor and type of sale for this year’s compost bin and rain barrel in conjunction with the Recycling Association of MN as noted on the flyer included in packet materials.

Discussion included significant snow/ice events this season with materials used to-date currently at 100% for the season; temporary arrangements made by Xcel Energy along the Rice Street corridor for pedestrian and bicycle traffic on pathways during their construction, with the new pathway intended at the same eight foot (8’) width and ADA upgrades to be incorporated by Xcel as applicable.

Mr. Schwartz advised that, as part of that project, Ramsey County would follow-up Xcel Energy’s utility work with a complete mill and overlay of that section of Rice Street.

Member Gjerdingen requested staff’s review of the materials (e.g. concrete or bituminous) for the pathway, also noting the awkward location for the trail based on multiple business access points.

Chair Vanderwall noted, and Mr. Schwartz provided an update, on the watermain break along McCarron’s Boulevard and Rice Street earlier today, anticipating that repairs should be completed by Wednesday morning to facilitate school bus and other traffic.  Mr. Schwartz noted that this area and that adjacent was under discussion for possible future main lining.

5.            Recycling Discussion

Mr. Schwartz reviewed the intent for tonight’s meeting in discussing and drafting community values as part of the upcoming request for proposals (RFP’s) for renewal of the City’s recycling contract, expiring at year-end 2013. 

Recycling Coordinator Tim Pratt

Mr. Pratt reviewed the previously-proposed pilot program for curbside collection of appliances, and the City Council’s decision on February 25, 2013, to not pursue this grant opportunity, which would have been paid in full by Ramsey County.

Mr. Pratt reviewed various attachments included over the last few months to facilitate tonight’s discussion on the City’s recycling program, and provided a summary of some of those studies and other pertinent points, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and including research and trends to-date in the recycling industry.  Mr. Pratt defined the often-used terms “MRF” and “MSW” as “materials recovery facility” and Municipal Solid Waste” respectively.

Councilmember Willmus arrived in the audience at this time, approximately 6:55 p.m.

Discussion included revenue parity between China and the United States, with China having significantly lower labor costs and impacts on manufacturer market-driven issues; cost of and ownership of carts with potential change from a dual to single-sort systems with no identifiable competitiveness based on provision of and/or amortization of carts; percentage of participation if and where organic collections are offered without significant increases in evidence and not necessarily encouraging a change of vendors by participants based on that factor alone; collection of organics weekly and differing from summer to winter seasons; and market forces and trends of manufacturers for potential future collection of plastic bottles at their point-of-sale.

Further discussion included examples of residential organics that could be collected (e.g. food scraps; non-recycling papers, such as food boxes with coatings; tissue and paper towels; dryer lint; vacuum cleaner bags); and the need for any ongoing research on future program for soiled diaper collection.

As the PWETC began consideration of the community values for the next RFP, Chair Vanderwall clarified that this should be an initial discussion, with staff then taking values provided by individual members after tonight’s meeting, and averaged on a spreadsheet for consideration at the next discussion for further refinement.

Collection Category

Discussion included whether having lids on bins provided any influence on participation levels and/or volumes collected; efficiencies of lidded bins on robotically-collected routes; sizes of bins for single-stream collection and impacts to increased collection; potential increased workers compensation rates for vendors in addressing size and weight of bins; and the need for continued education and feedback from haulers on contaminants and in keeping quality control in place.

Further discussion included ease of communication between vendors and participants to keep quality of collections up; ease of participation for residents; ongoing evaluation of participants and collections to eliminate contamination; single sort versus co-mingling of materials; how to encourage product stewardship by manufacturers; and the need to alert participants to the broader range of materials and their types as the markets become available.

Member Felice expressed concern with the term “co-mingling” and what was intended in previous value discussions.

Member Gjerdingen expressed concern with how to encourage participation at high-density housing units and commercial businesses.

Mr. Pratt clarified that all multi-family housing units are now included in residential collection; but the business community was not included in the City’s programs.

However, Chair Vanderwall noted that the City had recycling at all city-operated facilities; with Mr. Pratt confirming that all indoor facilities had offered recycling, with offering at parks at approximately at 60% availability at this time and still proceeding.

At the request of Chair Vanderwall, Mr. Pratt reviewed the rationale in how and why some plastics were acceptable and not others, based on the chemical make-up and melt temperatures impacting how they could be used (e.g. furniture making), and suggested the next RFP include an expanded plastics collection as bonus points in a value-added portion of the RFP.

Chair Vanderwall suggested that organics as well as more plastics be included under those items for collection.

Mr. Schwartz questioned if the PWETC wanted to consider if collection of organics should be a requirement based on future Ramsey County mandates, or a valued-added option.

Chair Vanderwall suggested a separate cost structure for organics.

Member DeBenedet suggested, since organic collections would soon be mandated, it not be included in evaluation criteria, and once in place another RFP could be developed.

Chair Vanderwall suggested that alternatives be considered for three (3) year and five (5) year contracts; opining that the longer the contract the more advantageous to vendors and their costs and subsequent costs for their proposals for vehicle and equipment amortization.

Further discussion included the illegality per City Code for people scavenging recyclables from collection points, while recognizing the difficulty in observing and enforcing compliance, especially with a higher concentration of aluminum cans at various area athletic events, but violations definitely affecting the City’s revenue stream from recyclables.  Mr. Pratt noted that the Police Department was aware of the problem.

Regarding Member Gjerdingen’s ongoing concerns regarding participation by multi-family complexes in residential recycling opportunities, Mr. Pratt noted that staff provides educational materials to the managers/owners of those buildings; however, not all of them and/or their tenants were conscientious or interested in voluntary or mandatory recycling efforts.  At the request of Member Gjerdingen, Mr. Pratt clarified that the annual report was a public document and provided comparisons for collection points and types.

In clarifying the value-added reward portion, Mr. Pratt advised that this was intended as a “wild card” if a vendor had some unique offering that was an unknown to the City at the time of the RFP but could become an unexpected bonus of a contractor with a particular vendor.

Member DeBenedet noted his concern that when recyclables are collected, they be recycled; and expressed how upset he would be if he knew the collected materials he put out curbside did not in fact go for recycling, but instead went into general garbage as a landfill; and suggested that the “collection” category include a portion for “materials efficiently recycled,” or similar language, and weighted higher than at ten points.

Chair Vanderwall noted the intent for individual members to provide any additional content or categories to staff, for further consideration and discussion by the body at a future meeting, along with edits and other suggestions.

Outreach/Education

Discussion included changing the equipment from “fossil fuel” to more options currently available;

With Member Gjerdingen’s concerns for business participation in recycling, Chair Vanderwall questioned if something needed to be included in RFP values to address that, not as a mandate, but to encourage participation.  While not currently mandated by the City Council, Mr. Pratt noted that if businesses chose to participate a system could be determined for billing them accordingly and as applicable.

Member DeBenedet suggested converting and simplifying scoring, and that frequent education of residents should be emphasized more, such as “contractor shall mail quarterly to participants a summary of what and how much was recycling” in an effort to generate excitement and competitiveness by residents for the recycling program.

Chair Vanderwall noted the City’s immigrant population who were unfamiliar with the culture, and therefore having the greatest learning curve in how to identify different areas for language-appropriate educational materials, especially in larger multi-family housing through letters, notices and also good, clear signage for their benefit

Mr. Pratt noted that it was easier to identify non-English speaking families in multi-family buildings, but more difficult in single-family residences.  Mr. Pratt advised that staff had worked with the current vendor and Somali and Karen populations for joint outreach projects with schools and their programs as well as city programs.

Chair Vanderwall opined that education was a vital growth market, since outreach was vitally important in attempts to continue increasing participation and collections.  Chair Vanderwall noted some current items that could be collected, but were not due to lack of information/knowledge (e.g. rag stock); with Mr. Pratt advising that staff fielded calls at specific times or seasons for those rag stock (e.g. back-to-school shopping in the fall, downsizing, and from estates).

Environment

Discussion included the four (4) current, city-sponsored events encouraging zero waste efforts and Mr. Pratt’s coordination of volunteers for those events; zero waste experience of other haulers whether local or from a broader area, with Mr. Pratt providing several examples of those efforts of which he was aware; coordination efforts of haulers relative to Earth Day activities in the community; and experience of staff over the last six (6) years in knowing what to expect of vendors.

Further discussion included how to encourage faith communities and community organizations interested in zero waste events, and if a vendor would be open to assisting those private organizations, whether non-religious or otherwise; and how to define how and if the City should or could be involved in those efforts for encouraging involvement while retaining separation, perhaps by helping to spread the word about such options.

Mr. Pratt noted the public interest for a food waste reduction workshop held at the most recent Home and Garden Fair.

Additional discussion included further opportunities at city-sponsored events (e.g. Rose Parade, Walk/Run); encouraging other organizations to participate in recycling efforts, not just for the benefit of the community, but for the more global community and sustainability efforts, possibly through provision of a packet of educational/instructional materials.

Discussion ensued regarding “fossil fuels,” with the consensus of members being that more concentration and concern for a vendor’s carbon footprint versus the type of fuel type should be weighted; concern that vendors may interpret that as providing fewer pick-ups to reduce their carbon footprint; and suggestion by Member DeBenedet that this only be one specification in setting value ratings for vendor selection, as a benefit, but not necessarily essential.

Other potential environmental weights included local vendors versus those servicing a larger geographical area; how far materials were being shipped; definition of “EPP” as environmentally preferred purchasing to minimize costs at the point of purchase as well as at the end.

Chair Vanderwall suggested providing a copy of tonight’s draft chart for Member Stenlund’s input as well, as he would be unavailable for the March or April meetings due to scheduling conflicts.

Categories from 2010 values and revisions based on this initial discussion:

Public Comment

Bob Willmus, appearing as resident, not in his role as a City Councilmember

Mr. Willmus repeated his request from a recent City Council meeting for the PWETC’s exploration of regional and national trends for single-sort recycling, including organics, with that exploration among vendors other than Eureka.

Chair Vanderwall responded that, the PWETC’s research (included in recent agenda packet materials and available online) indicated a bump in participation in moving to single-sort, as well as indications that more things ended up in the waste stream.  However, Chair Vanderwall indicated the need to balance both areas, and suggested the PWETC may end up providing recommendations to the City Council for both a single-sort and dual sort option.

Mr. Willmus suggested that, if larger carts could be provided at multi-family buildings by Eureka, it would be beneficial for all parties; and spoke in support of larger carts.  While recognizing fewer materials collected with a multi-stream sort, Mr. Willmus suggested that consideration also be given to demographic issues, referencing senior citizens calling Eureka for walk-up service, opining that it would soon negatively impact Eureka’s business significantly; and encouraged the PWETC to contact other vendors for current innovations and sort facility enhancements.

Along those lines, Mr. Schwartz requested other types of information still needed by the PWETC and/or City Council on those particular issues, or other information, follow-up, or research needs for staff to provide before the next PWETC meeting.

Member DeBenedet, from his perspective and in response to Mr. Willmus, requested more current data than already provided on what percentage of non-usable recycling materials being collected; and residuals between a single and dual sort system, since the information from the Roseville pilot project was considerably outdated.

Mr. Pratt clarified that the data from the pilot program was dated 2004-2005.

Whether or not the previous data remained valid in today’s market, Member DeBenedet opined that, given Roseville citizen interest in recycling, the best service would be providing for the most quantity pick-up, while proving the materials are recycled and not simply diverted to a landfill.

Chair Vanderwall noted his additional interest in exploring options for larger bins and whether that would serve to increase and keep improving that participation.

Discussion ensued regarding types of private collections bins, and the ease for haulers in picking up materials from those bins purchased privately and dependent on their equipment.

Mr. Schwartz advised that his residence in Little Canada had single stream recycling collection, and he found their household produced three times as much recycling as waste.

Mr. Pratt noted that no current vendors serving the immediate area were currently providing weekly collection for single stream collection at this time.

Kathy Klink, 335 Ryan Avenue (by Villa Park)

In moving forward, Ms. Click spoke in support of the community values being developed to guide the process moving forward; and expressed her appreciation to the PWETC for their efforts.  While having some involvement with the recycling industry, Ms. Click clarified that she was attending as a private citizen.

Concluding discussion included clarifying the request for staff to send out a clean list of values via spreadsheet, with the 2010 value weighting, along with a blank column for changes.

Chair Vanderwall asked that individual PWETC members get their ranking weights, and any other input, to staff for processing to the entire body within a few days; then allowing the next iteration sufficient lead time for members to add any additional topics or make adjustments; followed-up with a second e-mail provided by staff to members with member response to staff to process those numbers for forwarding to the body for consideration at the next discussion.

Chair Vanderwall thanked Mr. Pratt for his attendance at tonight’s meeting and for guiding the PWETC through this community value discussion process.

6.            Possible Items for Next Meeting – March 26, 2013

·         Felice – transportation issues with light rail, etc. (Felice)

With member consensus, Mr. Schwartz suggested a presentation/discussion by Metro Transit.

·         LED street lighting – follow-up discussion

Mr. Schwartz advised that a retrofit plan should be forthcoming with an anticipated budget.

·         Recycling Program - continued discussion

·         Solar Installations on City Facilities

Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was working preliminarily with a company for consideration of such installations; and advised that staff intended to have a representative from that company available for the March PWETC meeting.  Mr. Schwartz advised that there were rebates available, and that costs and other information should be available for that meeting if available, or possibly deferred until the April meeting.

·         Construction Projects - communication updates

Chair Vanderwall asked that Mr. Schwartz provide the 2013 construction calendar to him at I.S.D. 623 as soon as available for bus routes around road closures.

·         Way finding issues follow up discussion based on Mr. Spack’s presentation about crosswalks and timing issues (Gjerdingen).

Mr. Schwartz advised that there had been some discussion with the Trails Group through the Parks and Recreation Master Plan process.

Member DeBenedet concurred; noting that Ms. Bloom was to provide additional information to him and Member Gjerdingen so they could provide information to the full PWETC body and receive direction for their voting authority at the next meeting of that group in mid-March.  Member DeBenedet asked that it be added to the next PWEC agenda.

7.            Adjourn

Member DeBenedet moved, Member Felice seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:35 p.m.

Ayes: 4

Nays: 0

Motion carried.