Additional Green Waste and Recycling Containers

Recycling in the non-residential commercial sector and multi-family sector is voluntary. Although single stream recycling services are readily available and secondary markets for recyclables are easily accessible, the Waste Characterization Study conducted in 2012 estimated that the recycling rate for this sector was just ten percent. The Study recommended implementation of mandatory recycling at non-residential commercial and multi-family properties, and estimated it may increase the diversion rate by as much as 20 percent, resulting in up to 20,000 tons of additional materials being recycled instead of landfilled each year. The commercial waste sector makes up 50 percent of the city’s waste stream. Residential diversion efforts alone will not allow us to achieve ambitious overall waste reduction goals if commercial diversion continues to lag. The proposed ordinance applies to any property that generates more than four cubic yards of refuse and recycling per week. Four cubic yards is approximately equal to eight, 96-gallon curbside bins. Multi-family complexes with approximately fifteen or more units will be impacted. Nearly one third of all housing units in Salt Lake City are considered multi-family, and over two thirds of all multi-family housing units will be affected. It is expected that businesses with over 10 – 15 employees, depending on the type of business, may be affected. Through the public process, concerns have been raised by businesses regarding the potential financial impact of the requirement. Service agreements in Salt Lake City show that haulers typically charge 20-30% less for recycling hauls compared to garbage hauls. Some haulers include recycling with garbage service at no additional charge. As a result of this ordinance, recycling service agreements may become more cost competitive. The most significant cost savings can be realized by decreasing the frequency of garbage hauls due to waste being diverted through recycling. Minor cost savings can be realized through decreasing the garbage dumpster size. On average, most properties that have full participation in recycling from tenants and employees should not see much, if any increase in service costs. The proposed ordinance includes exemptions. A considerable challenge for some properties may be the space required for the additional dumpster. City ordinance 21A.36.250 allows for voluntary conversion of parking spaces to provide a recycling collection station. If there is not adequate space on the property to accommodate a recycling container without violating zoning ordinance, and it is infeasible to share container with adjoining property, the property would be exempt. Enforcement The Sustainability Division’s Enforcement and Education team will be responsible for enforcement. During the first six months after the ordinance has passed, staff will work with local haulers to help them through the process in becoming an Authorized Hauler under the ordinance, and requirements affecting their customers. Staff will work with haulers to ensure continual compliance with quarterly reporting requirements, investigate complaints, and work with Authorized Haulers and individual property owners establishing recycling programs and educate tenants and employees.

Additional Green Waste and Recycling Containers During the fall, approximately 500 extra green waste containers are distributed to residents who request extra capacity for leaves. The amendment allows for the distribution of containers without charging additional fees. A small number of residents have requested an additional green waste container or recycling container, but have no need for additional refuse containers. The amendment allows the Department of Public Services to assess the residents’ needs individually and provide one additional green waste and/or recycling container for no additional fee to allow residents with excess recyclables and green waste to further contribute to the City’s waste diversion goals. Amendment of Fine Schedule for Non-compliance The proposed amendment includes an escalated fine schedule where unpaid penalties escalate over time. This is consistent with other fine schedules established in city code. The department’s procedure for enforcement allows for up to three warnings before a citation is issued. Over 95% of violations are corrected after the first warning tag is issued. PUBLIC PROCESS: The following timeline lists key events in the public process: Presentation to SLC Business Advisory Board: December 2012

Tabling at the Planning Division open house: February 2013 Internal email to City Departments for comment: May 2013

Posted on Open City Hall: Nov. 2013 – January 2014 Presentation to SL Chamber, DT Advisory Board: December 2013 Presentations to SLC Business Advisory Board: January 2014 March 2014 Meetings with Service Providers: January – February 2014 Meeting with Downtown Alliance and City Creek: February 2014 After discussing the topic at several meetings, the SLC Business Advisory Board submitted a letter to the Mayor and City Council on April 9, 2014. The Board expressed concern over the financial impact and reporting requirements and suggested offering financial incentives for businesses to recycle, rather than a mandates. In a board meeting, one member suggested the City provide a resource for assisting businesses in establishing recycling programs and training employees. Adjustments were made to the draft ordinance to lift reporting requirements for businesses. Data needed to assess impact and calculate diversion rates in the commercial sector will instead be gathered from the authorized service providers. There were 419 visitors to the topic on Open City Hall, and 59 statements were submitted. Statements were generally supportive, especially from residents living in

multi-family housing. Emails were also submitted directly to the Division of Sustainability. City staff met with City Creek management and the Downtown Alliance in February 2014 to discuss specific concerns. City Creek management concerns were related to language in the proposed ordinance requiring capacity to recycle fifty percent of waste and whether that translated into a requirement to actually recycle fifty percent of their waste. The proposed ordinance does not require a minimum recycling rate. Meetings were held with service providers, haulers and recycling facilities to solicit feedback. Comments from most service providers were related to confidentiality of customer information and the threshold for assessing fines for contamination. The proposed ordinance was amended to address those concerns. The requirement for detailed customer information was taken out but maintains requirements for quarterly reporting of data necessary to demonstrate impact and calculate diversion rate. The threshold establishing the minimum contamination level for which an authorized hauler may assess a fine was decreased from 40 percent to 25 percent, which is consistent with the current practice at the recycling sorting facilities.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. ORDINANCE

2. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON OPEN CITY HALL

3. LETTER RECEIVED FROM BUSINESS ADVISORY BOARD

4. EMAIL MESSAGES SENT TO SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION

ATTACHMENT 1

Ordinance – Red Lined Ordinance – Final

ATTACHMENT 2

COMMENTS FROM OPEN CITY HALL

All Statements sorted chronologically

As of March 6, 2014, 6:45 AM

As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarilyrepresentative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.


As of March 6, 2014, 6:45 AM http://peakdemocracy.com/1575

Proposed Business & Multi-Family Recycling OrdinanceSalt Lake City is considering recycling requirements for businesses and multi-family (apartment) units toincrease recycling rates. What do you think of the proposed ordinance?

Introduction

Salt Lake City’s goal is to decrease waste and divert recyclable waste from the landfill. In Salt Lake City’s ZeroWaste Resolution, the city aims for 50% diversion by 2015, 70% diversion by 2025, and Zero Waste by 2040.

To reach this goal, business and multi-family recycling rates need to increase to catch up to current residentialrecycling rates.

Comments on all aspects of the proposed ordinance will be accepted through January 31, 2014.

At that time, City staff will review comments, make any applicable revisions to the ordinance and present areport to the Salt Lake City Mayor's Office.

The information below outlines the current recycling rates in Salt Lake City and highlights the key provisions inthe proposed ordinance. Review the complete draft ordinance (PDF).

Current Situation – Residential

Salt Lake City is the refuse and recycling collection service provider for all single-family, duplexes and triplexeswithin Salt Lake City. Participation in curbside recycling and the curbside green waste program is required.

Through curbside recycling, glass recycling, green waste collection and diversion of green waste through theNeighborhood Cleanup program, the City has achieved a diversion rate of 38% for the residential sector.

Current Situation – Non-residential/Commercial and Multi-family

Recycling by the non-residential commercial sector and multi-family residential sector is voluntary. A studycompleted in the spring of 2012 estimated that the recycling rate for the non-residential and multi-family sectorin Salt Lake City was approximately 10%.

Single stream recycling services are readily available. Facilities exist within Salt Lake City to accept glass,shredded paper, scrap metal and cardboard. One facility exists to accept green waste for composting.

Proposed Ordinance

Required Recycling for Properties/Businesses

Any non-residential and multi-family property owner or manager where *4 or more cubic yards of solid wasteare generated per week must:

Subscribe to recycling collection service from an authorized hauler. Designate area(s) for recycling containers accessible by service provider. Implement a recycling program for use by occupants, employees or residents that is as convenient to access as


As of March 6, 2014, 6:45 AM http://peakdemocracy.com/1575 Page 2 of 20


trash collection. Distribute educational recycling information to occupants, employees or residents annually. Submit, annually, a copy of recycling collection service agreement to the City. *4 cubic yards is roughly equivalent to 8, 90-gallon residential curbside containers

Exemptions for Properties/Businesses

If the property generates less than 4 cubic yards of trash per week. If the property can demonstrate that at least 50% of their waste, by volume or weight, is diverted through otherservices. i.e. by collection of green waste (food scraps, yard trimmings) for composting; or if all mixed wastematerial is delivered to a material recovery facility that demonstrates, through sample sorts or other means, thatover 50% of material is diverted through sorting and recycling. Facility and business operations do not generate significant amount of recyclable waste (i.e. more than 1 cubicyard per week or 2 cubic yards every other week). If there is not adequate storage space for recycling containers (resulting in violation of zoning code) and it isinfeasible for a container to be shared with adjoining property. Requirements of Authorized Hauler

Any hauler of solid waste and recyclable material from a property within Salt Lake City boundaries must submitan application to the Sustainability Division and agree to:

Provide, directly or through cooperation with another Authorized Hauler, recycling collection services andcontainers sufficient to accommodate quantity and types of recyclable materials for all of its customers. Charge one fee which includes recycling and refuse service, or, if a separate fee is charged for refuse andrecycling services, the fee for recycling may not be in excess of 80% of the free for the equivalent level of refuseservice. Pay an annual registration fee. Deliver recyclable material which has been separated from refuse to a recycling facility. May charge a contamination fee if contamination of recycling container exceeds 40%. Provide quarterly reports to the Sustainability Division on recycling, refuse and green waste activity, including alist of customers who have had contamination fees assessed with the date(s) fees were assessed. Requirements at Special Events

Events where 4 or more cubic yards of trash are generated during the event must:

Provide recycling receptacles throughout the event location, with capacity that is at least equal to the capacityof trash containers. Place recycling and trash containers adjacent to one another during the event. Ensure that all recycling receptacles have signage indicating acceptable items. Effective Date

Refuse and recycling collection service providers must apply to become an Authorized Hauler within six monthsof the date of publication of the ordinance. Generators (property managers/owner) must provide copy of service agreement within eighteen months of thedate of publication.




Enforcement

Enforcement actions by the Sustainability Division may include education, warnings, and/or fines. Enforcementmay be triggered by:

Complaints received Observation of non-authorized hauler collection refuse or recyclables from a property within the City Delinquent reports by Authorized Hauler Generator fails to provide required recycling services Generator is delinquent in providing a copy of service agreement Repeated incidents where a Generator has been assessed a contamination fee by an Authorized Hauler Observation of special events that do provide access to recycling for attendees Fines may be assessed for:

Each day a Generator fails to provide recycling services for required property Each day a Generator is delinquent in providing a copy of the recycling service agreement Each day a Hauler is delinquent in providing required reports Incidents where a non-authorized hauler is observed collecting trash and or recyclables from a property withinSalt Lake City boundaries Incidents where a hauler is observed delivering material that has been separated for recycling to a landfill,waste transfer station, or incinerator Results

According to the EPA’s 2010 Report on Municipal Solid Waste, the breakdown of the municipal waste streamgenerated that could be diverted through recycling was: Paper (28%); Plastic (12%); Metal (9%); Glass (5%).

According to a waste study completed for Salt Lake City in the spring of 2012, requiring recycling for non-residential/commercial and multi-family properties may increase the commercial sector diversion rate from 10%to 25%, and divert an additional 20,000 tons of recyclable material from the landfill.

Contact Us

If you have questions or comments, please contact Debbie Lyons at (801) 535-7795 [email protected]. Email comments are preferred.

Proposed Business & Multi-Family Recycling OrdinanceSalt Lake City is considering recycling requirements for businesses and multi-family (apartment) units to increase recycling rates. What do you think of the proposed ordinance?



As of March 6, 2014, 6:45 AM, this forum had:Attendees: 398All Statements: 59Hours of Public Comment: 3.0




Name not available (unclaimed) January 30, 2014, 11:23 AM

This is an excellent initiative, and something that should have been done long ago!

Name not shown inside Council District 2 (on forum) January 30, 2014, 10:30 AM

I think offering recycling in apartment buildings and more businesses is a wonderful idea. Every time I havelived in an apartment in the last 6 years not once was recycling offered. By requiring to at least having the binsis a huge step towards people using the bins. Also posting what can and cant be recycled to each tenant makesthem aware of what they can do to help recycle more. B

Jason Utgaard inside Council District 5 (on forum) January 30, 2014, 12:38 AM

PLEASE PASS THIS ORDINANCE. We have citizens who desperately want to recycle, but are trapped inbuildings without the necessary receptacles to do so. Also:

FACT: In 2011 (3 years ago mind you, but latest data I could find), the State of Utah generated 2,071,732 tonsof Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). - - This equates to 4,143,464,000 pounds, or in other words 7,883.3 poundsPER MINUTE. Ask yourself: where is it all going? - Answer: it is going to a landfill that is getting bigger &bigger & bigger. This is not sustainable, and business & multi-family units create a large percentage of thiswaste.

FACT: Landfills add to poor air quality. From the EPA's website: "Possibly the biggest health and environmentalconcerns are related to the uncontrolled surface emissions of LFG (landfill gas) into the air. LFG containscarbon dioxide, methane, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), and odorouscompounds that can adversely affect public health and the environment. For example, carbon dioxide andmethane are greenhouse gases that CONTRIBUTE TO GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE." - They of course alsocause soil & groundwater pollution.

THINK of all of the resources we're letting slip away into landfills each & every day! For example, take analuminum can:

How many times can aluminum cans be recycled? - ANSWER: Indefinitely. - Aluminum cans have no limit onthe number of times they can be recycled. They can also be recycled very quickly: 1 aluminum can can bemade into another in as little as 60-days (source: Aluminum Association).

The LARGEST LANDFILL IN THE COUNTRY (Puente Hills in California) JUST CLOSED in October. So youask, where's it going? (...if it were nuclear waste, you'd probably guess Utah...) - Well, it is now being placed onCOAL-BURNING TRAINS to be transported 200-miles away and stuffed in an abandoned gold mine. Then afterthat, where to?... - - Let's not follow their lead!




This ordinance represents the tip of the iceberg: next up, we tackle curbside composting, more e-Wasterecycling locations, building demolition/construction refuse, etc.

Name not shown inside Council District 3 (on forum) January 17, 2014, 1:39 PM

Necessary and important! Our 8-apartment complex does not have recycling bins despite requests fromrenters. As a result we store it all in our apartments and then look for empty blue bins on our street on recyclingday.

Any chance we could also fine people for not recycling?

Name not shown inside Council District 4 (on forum) January 11, 2014, 3:57 PM

This is great, I fully support it. Smart and powerful people of Salt Lake City, please make this happen. It willsolve a problem so many people wish they had a solution for right now.

Jason Mathis inside Council District 4 (on forum) January 9, 2014, 12:33 PM

This is a goal that everybody should get behind - everyone wants to recycle. But for some people affected bythe new mandate there will be significant costs involved. My advice: make it easy to do the right thing. The realsuccess will come in how it is rolled out and communicated. Since this is a priority for Salt Lake City, it makessense that the City should help mitigate some of the new costs that will be born by businesses and multi-familyresidences. I personally support this as a goal and I'm happy to personally recycle at my business and singlefamily house. But if this community-wide approach is truly important to Salt Lake City's leaders, the City's ownresources should be devoted to supporting the effort. City leaders should find a way to reimburse businessesand multi-family units for additional costs created by the proposal. As more and more people recycle the costsshould come down for everyone so this start-up incentive doesn't have to last forever. But it would make it amuch easier pill to swallow if there were some initial resources devoted to help covering initial costs. If youmake it easy - and cost effective - to do the right thing, you will actually have allies and supporters in thebusiness community. Everybody win! If you feel like this approach may be too expensive for the City, I wouldquestion whether it is really a high city priority. Some ideas about incentives to consider: you could offer areduction off the new 13 percent property tax hike as a tax incentive / break to compensate for new recyclingcosts. . .or a reduction in the new street lighting fees, impact fees, property tax hike to pay for the public safetybuilding ,etc. You could also offer grants or socialize the recycling service by taking them in house andproviding business and multi-family recycling as a subsidized city service (like police+fire services, trashcollection, snow removal etc.)

Name not available (unclaimed) January 8, 2014, 3:20 PM

It would be worth considering separating these two and doint Multi-Family first and then Business 2-3 years




later. Please consider. Thank you.

Name not available (unclaimed) December 31, 2013, 3:40 PM

I absolutely think this is needed! We are currently renting a condo and the condo complex/association does nothave and currently refuses to get any sort of recycling bin for the complex. In addition, the condocomplex/association also refuses to allow individual tenants to get their own individual recycling bins from thecity, because of fear of congestion with so many individual bins. We have spoken with our Landlords, who ownonly our individual condo unit, and they are in agreement that a recycling bin is necessary; they have petitionedthe condo association to get a recycling bin and have been turned down.

Because my family seeks to be good citizens and recycle, we are forced to use valuable storage space insideour condo unit to store our recycling. Then, when it builds up, we have to make trips to places to drop it off. Wehave asked local friends who own homes if we can add to their bins, but this is only possible some of the time.We often resort to driving our recycling to Murray to drop off in my sister-in-law's bin. I would guess that manypeople in this situation wouldn't go to as much effort to sacrifice storage space in a condo to collect recycling,load it in the car on a regular basis, and drop it all off somewhere--and that amounts to TONS of unnecessarywaste that many people in multi-family apartments are most likely dumping in the garbage because they don'tfeel they have the space or time to go to such efforts. In this issue, it is as if those who can afford to own homesare being rewarded with easy access to recycling, and those in multi-family units (for whom money and space isoften very limited) are being forced to sacrifice their limited apartment space, their time, and their gas money, inattempts to be good citizens.


Our family currently lives in a multi-unit condo complex. Our complex does not currently offer any recyclingservices or bins; nearly all recyclable material in our complex is simply thrown away in the trash. Our family hasalways found this to be a disturbing practice. When we first moved into our complex, we inquired propertymanagement if it was possible for the complex to provide a recycling bin; the answer was "no," due to the extracost this would incur on the complex. We then learned that Salt Lake City provides curbside recycling bins forfree. We subsequently inquired the property management if our family could request one of these smaller binsfrom the city for our own personal use. Again, property management said "no," because if they agreed to allowour family to have a bin, then perhaps other families in the complex would also want a bin, and then thecomplex may be overrun with family-size curbside bins. Rather than providing one large recycling dumpster forthe complex, our complex continues to provide no recycling at all. Consequently, our family continues to collectour own recyclable material, and periodically we bring our recycling collection to our family members who live inMurray and Lehi, who then dispose of our recycling in their own recycling bins.

Ultimately, it is a sad disappointment that in a city that provides free recycling services, we cannot access theseservices due to the policies of our multi-unit condo complex. Instead, we are forced to rely on the recyclingservices of Murray and Lehi, by bringing our recyclable materials to other family members in the region who dohave access to these services. We are undoubtedly just one of thousands of city resident families who live inmulti-unit living complexes who are unable to recycle due to the policies of our living complex. Furthermore, the




city landfill continues to be unnecessarily inundated with trash that could easily be recycled. It is our sincerehope that the city of Salt Lake will work to remedy this problem.


I'm absolutely in favor. I live in a large apt building (the woodruff 235 s 200 e) and they have never offeredrecycling of any kind and they won't until it's required. It's always bothered me as most modern waste isrecyclable.

Nick Steffens inside Council District 4 (on forum) December 22, 2013, 3:02 PM

This is an excellent plan: reasonable and progressive.

Name not available (unclaimed) December 21, 2013, 10:08 AM

Yes, recycling should be requisite for the well being of our community and society. Glass recycling would begreat too!

Name not shown inside Council District 4 (on forum) December 17, 2013, 10:42 AM

Long overdue! Please, implement this!

Name not shown inside Council District 6 (on forum) December 3, 2013, 7:37 AM

I work at one of the high rises in downtown Salt Lake. Our building does not have a recycling pick up, exceptpaper. They do pick up corrugated boxes, but I'm afraid to ask, and am pretty sure, that they just put these inthe trash to go to the landfill. I hate the thought. So for 6+ years, I have taken a huge bag, every week, homewith me and put it in my already quite full recycle bin. Not the corrugated boxes or even the pop cans (I takethose to the recycle plant), or paper mind you, but the every day garbage from our small office that qualifies asrecyclable. Now I don't have a car, so when I can, I use our company vehicle to take it home, or on theoccasional times I have use of the family car. But, I have taken with me on my TRAX to bus commute home.This bag is usually us big as me! Why you ask - because it matters. Yes I do support this!

1 Supporter

Matthew Kirkegaard inside Council District 6 (on forum) November 21, 2013, 5:30 PM

This is a well-reasoned and long overdue ordinance with the potential to create a more sustainable Salt Lake




City. Not for lack of awareness or desire to recycle, many in our city are frustrated that their landlords don'tprovide access to recycling. This is the right step as we look to reduce our waste incrementally towards zero by2040. I applaud the substantial efforts of Mayor Becker, the City Council, and the many civil servants working tomake Salt Lake City a sustainable place to years to come.

3 Supporters

Mercedes Hunt inside Council District 5 (on forum) November 21, 2013, 10:42 AM

I would love for Salt Lake to offer more recycling facilities. Ideally, everywhere you see a trash can that goes tolandfill, you would see a recycling bin. People in apartment complexes should be recycling as well. Currently inmy neighborhood, the majority of apartment complexes do NOT have a recycling options separate from LibertyPark. We need to educate children about the importance of recycling and then implement it in the homes aswell. Thank you for proposing this new ordinance, it would be exciting for the city to move forward and divertless waste to landfills! First stop, recycling, next let's add recycling of glass in the regular recycling bins andcompost bins for food scraps!

2 Supporters

Name not shown inside Council District 6 (on forum) November 20, 2013, 9:36 PM

Every apartment complex and every business in SLC should provide recycling facilities.

2 Supporters

Eric Hamren outside Salt Lake City Council Districts (on forum) November 20, 2013, 6:39 PM

I fully support this. I think recycling should be required city wide!!! The complex I live in has over 20 units and norecycling. It drives me nuts! I have to lug all of my recycling to work and save all of our glass to take it acrosstown. I also think there needs to be a transition period so the city can cope with a substantial increase inpickups and routes. ie: require apts and businesses to have recycling by the end of 2014 or 2015. Betterchance of them signing on in waves instead of all at once.

2 Supporters


Yes! I hope this includes government offices. I work at the Capitol and they do plain paper recycling but you arenot allowed to add in cardboard, etc. why on earth does a government building not recycle? Also... Thecafeteria has a dish room and opts to not use it and puts everything in styrofoam, even for the many of us onsite that could use regular dishes. Absurd!!! Make them act responsibly, please!!!!!

1 Supporter





YES! I support this proposed ordinance. Let's get this going and reach that 50% goal for 2015!

1 Supporter

Rex Strother inside Council District 6 (on forum) November 20, 2013, 9:27 AM

It only makes sense to collect recycling at points where greater amounts of waste are being generated. I workat One Utah Center and the only recycling available is what we do ourselves - by lugging the recycling home.The idea that a 25-floor building which generates quite literally tons of easily recyclable plastic, aluminum,paper and cardboard waste that is all simply dumped into a single trash compactor and hauled to the landfill ....is in this age, ridiculous. And let's not even mention all the CFL bulbs tossed into the trash by the maintenancestaff, etc. (kidding, obviously let's totally mention it).

I can't speak out on reporting requirements, as I'd say we begin with making sure we provide the bins and thatrecycling is in everyone's mind. To that end - perhaps better reporting by the City on the successfultransmutation of our recycling efforts NOW. How many tons of each product are being recycled from ourexisting bins - where did it go - how did it do the world some good (aside from not filling up a landfill). I'd like tosee some positive news - regularly - about our recycling efforts.

I personally take all the plastic and pressboard trash home from the 5 floors of our law firm, and fill two 90gallon bins at home each week. Someone else takes the aluminum cans once a week, and our firm uses ourvan to haul cardboard to Metro Recycling. That's the effort at our law firm. We also save up e-waste (which weused to simply toss out) and now delivery hundreds of pounds each quarter to Metech Recycling.

1 Supporter

Mark Maxfield inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 20, 2013, 7:45 AM

We have a 31 unit property near the UofU and have provided two city blue containers adjacent to a smallerdumpster since we acquired the property. We also have several smaller rental units (all with brown and bluerecycling bins). We explain our recycling policy to each tenant as they sign the lease and most comply with this.I do not welcome additional fees or costly resources being spent to force others to comply but wouldrecommend the "carrot approach" similar to the "good landlord program" by providing a reduced cost incentivefor those willing to comply. If landlords and/or property owners were given a more economical options thatwould reduce their waste costs by willingly screening their waste, I believe most would willingly comply.

1 Supporter

Name not shown inside Council District 3 (on forum) November 17, 2013, 10:05 AM

I support this proposal but also express concern about annual filing of recycling agreement. Is this anunnecessary bureaucratic burden for small businesses and landlords? I think we need to be doing everythingwe possibly can to encourage a reduction in commercial and residential waste. Thanks for the opportunity togive feedback.





Yes. Recycling should be a requirement. There should be fewer barriers to recycling then trash disposal. Bothare necessary, but recycling should be incentivized over trash collection.


I fully support this plan! I agree with the City's proposal that proof of compliance should be required every year.Furthermore, I strongly feel that tenants (as well as single-family home dwellers) should be held financiallyaccountable for their non-recycling actions and/or recycling contamination. Apathy or ignorance are not validreasons for tenants to put an undue burden on property owners or recycling companies. This program,however, needs to be affordable so we don't see an unrealistic rent increase for low-income people. How canthe city prevent landlords from 'padding' the rents for this? Should this be charged as a separate fee with a citymandated cap on costs to the renter?

1 Supporter


I fully support this proposal except as others have noted, the requirement to submit paperwork each yearshould not be included. I live in a 37 unit condo complex and we have been recycling for years ... and weadded glass recycling over a year ago. Most everyone cooperates (there will always be those that just don't getit) and no one complained about the extra cost.

1 Supporter


I completely support requiring all businesses to recycle, even those with less than 4 cubic yards of wasteproduced per week. I think that for the smaller businesses the city could provide them (or a group ofbusinesses in the same area) one or two 90 gallon blue bins and charge similar to what they would a singlefamily residence with their water bill.

I think though that that the multifamily units will be problematic. Too many of them are so old that they don'teven have space (or screening) for the existing trash dumpster(s). Second, most of the tenants just don't give acare about separating their trash and will just use whatever can happens to be empty at the moment. Fining ahauling company, who will then fine the landlord, who will then increase rent for all his tenants rather than trackdown the offender (because it is easiest) is a waste of time and hurts housing affordability.

I believe that it would be better to make it mandatory for all new multi-family developments to provide forrecycling in this manner and exempt all existing ones. However, if a current landlord wishes to participatevoluntarily we should have rules that would reduce any fines that may be levied against them.

1 Supporter





Expanded recycling and composting would be a welcome addition to the city. I would also like to see acampaign to promote consuming and disposing of less waste overall. We need to be more sustainable andresponsible with our waste within our community.

2 Supporters


I'm fully in favor of the new ordinance.

1 Supporter


I fully support this effort. I would not require that copies of the contract be sent in annually. In addition to theextra bureaucracy, it seems that would generate a lot of paper for a program trying to minimize waste.


I agree that all business and multi units should be required to recycle. Everyone must do their part, while stwork and home.

1 Supporter

Carole Straughn inside Council District 7 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 10:48 PM

I support extending recycling requirements to business and multi-family residences on the way to zero waste in2040. I know people who are frustrated that their landlords don't provide a way to recycle. How hard would it beto offer city services as an option to conforming to this new mandate?

4 Supporters

jeri fowles inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 10:28 PM

As a homeowner and apartment owner that insists on recycling from our tenants, I think this is a necessarymove in the right direction. We should all be held accountable for our own waste. I do hope there will be someeducation funds that accompany this ordinance. It takes education to change our habits.

6 Supporters

Steven McQuinn inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 10:14 PM




As a tenant in a seven unit converted Victorian close to the University, I oversee our recycling efforts. We wouldnot fall under this proposed ordinance because the total waste generated by the seven small apartments doesnot amount to more than one cubic yard per week.

Nevertheless, I think my observations might be useful, and would scale up to large complexes.

Of the one cubic yard per week, we sometimes fill one blue bin by week's end but often fall short of that. Thegarbage cans are picked up by a private service, the four of them together accounting for the other half a cubicyard. If you concluded from this that the recyclables to trash ratio is 50:50 you would be mistaken. That's thecompliance ratio, not the actual ratio. Often, there are more recyclables in the garbage cans than in the bluebin. If everybody cooperated, our ratio could be 70:30 in favor of recyclables.

What I've learned from direct inspection is that most of what is thrown into the garbage cans is recyclablepackaging waste. Sometimes I pull this out of the cans, making sure it contains no food, and put it in the bluerecycling bin, but I cease such efforts when garbage and bathroom wastes are mixed in, which quite often is thecase.

If all the tenants were conscientious, there would be more weeks when one blue bin would be insufficientwithout diligent compaction.

The solution, as I see it, would scale up to businesses and multiple family complexes of any size. The solutionis separation and compaction of recyclables at the time they are thrown away within the household or place ofbusiness.

Separation alone is as easy as non separation. A flick of the wrist isn't any more trouble if aimed at the indoorrecycling container instead of the garbage container. Separation of recyclables depends on awareness andconscientiousness, but it doesn't require any more trouble. If people separated their recyclables from their othertrash when they threw things away, our garbage cans would seldom be full and our blue bin would always fill upby Sunday.

Compaction, however, does take effort. Nobody in the seven units has a trash compactor and nobody does thisby hand and foot but me. I am the defacto trash compactor for all seven compartments. Several times a week Iinspect the blue bin to make sure all items therein are compliant (the most frequent violation is solid foampacking materials concealed within discarded packing boxes).

While conducting a compliance inspection I compact boxes, plastic containers, and anything else that isessentially an enclosure of air. I have two poles for pounding down the waste to make more room. I will fishthings out, like plastic bottles and aluminum cans, toss them to the asphalt and stomp them flat. I tear boxesinto sheets of cardboard, and line the inside circumference of the blue bin with these sheets so they displaceminimal volume. This oversight can be a bit of work, sometimes, work that I wish the tenants performed whenthey separated and crushed items within the household, in the act of throwing them away.

I'm telling this personal anecdote to make the point that compliance begins at the moment packaging becomestrash, inside a household or business. Turning the screw on landlords isn't going to help much with meeting thecity's recycling goals. I realize that in America, managing by force and coercion has a long tradition despite the




fact that it seldom works.

What the city needs to do is supply tenants in multiple family complexes with recycling collection containers foruse within households, and have a similar policy of facilitation for businesses. These indoor containers shoulduse the same traditional blue with the recycling logo. Families with children should be given coloring books forkids illustrating the recycling habit, the bins already colored blue. Propagandizing kids is a great way to controladults, as kids can be the conscience of the family.

Complexes and businesses needing compactors for efficient use of blue bin volume should be aided by the cityin some way.

In summary, the take home lesson from my experience as a recycling manager in a small apartment building isthat recycling begins in the home and the workplace. Make separation and compaction a habit by providing thetools.

7 Supporters


It is about time!

2 Supporters

Glenn Sorensen inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 8:25 PM

I completely agree with maximizing the recycling of waste. I live in and own a 12 unit apartment building andreplaced my 3 CY dumpster with 2-90 gallon private trash bins and 3-90 gallon city blue recycle bins. I still havesome tenants who refuse to recycle even after much coaxing. In the fourplex next to my building the tenantsrefuse to recycle even with the city provided blue recycle bin and brown organic waste bin. I worry about thisordinance adding additional city bureaucracy and paperwork on businesses. I am also concerned that there willbe too much contamination of the recycled waste in large residential complexes. I lived in Fairfax ,VA beforemoving to SLC and they have a $25 fine for repeat offenders of the recycling regulations (for instancecontaminating the recycle bins with non recyclables). As a landlord, if I was levied a fine like that, I would trackdown the offending tenant and charge them. The city needs to research a way to get the renters to recycle.Maybe through the Good Landlord Program require leases to including recycling. The city already checks thebins leaving notes for offenders that are ignored or not seen by tenants. Better compliance would be achievedby levying a $25 fine for non compliance on repeat offenders.


I think that all multi-family dwellings and businesses should be required to recycle. At this point, haulingservices for mixed recyclables, green waste, and glass are available for every entity that produces waste in SaltLake City and there is no excuse not to maximize the amount of waste that can be diverted from the landfill. A




full scope of recycling makes our city look more environmentally friendly and progressive. Requiring multi-familydwellings and businesses to recycle is a long overdue step.


I support recycling 100%. I oppose all the bureaucracy - reports, fines for being a day! late, etc. I would alsolike to see some guarantee that fees won't be passed on to renters, many of whom are already struggling to payrent. Businesses (except for very small ones) should be required to recycle. I also think we should have openand public bidding for the recycling contracts. And while you're at it, my "green waste" container won't evenhold half the leaves from a .1 acre lot! What are we supposed to do with green waste if we have nowhere andno way to dispose of it? And can we PLEASE have curbside recycling for glass in SLC? I've lived in towns of5,000 people and they managed it. Why can't we? If we can't manage residential recycling properly, maybewe're not ready to expand - although I still support the proposal with the above caveats.


I agree with this ordinance but would also recommend against mandatory reporting.

Mike Christensen outside Salt Lake City Council Districts (on forum) November 5, 2013, 3:14 PM

Are there examples of recycling programs actually working with multi-family housing? First of all, I supportrecycling unequivocally! I have lived in my townhome for over six years. During four of those six years, I servedon the home-owners association board of our 92-unit complex. We have a total of four six-cubic-yarddumpsters for trash, which are emptied twice per week by a private refuse company. Being environmentallyminded people, we decided as a board to try converting two of the four dumpsters to mixed-stream recycling.We tried as best as we could to spread the word in our community by distributing fliers door to door and makingannouncements in our newsletter. Unfortunately, most residents just kept dumping trash in the dumpstersdesignated for recycling. The refuse company eventually switched the two recycling dumpsters back to trashdumpsters. During the trial we were never able to produce a load of recycling that was uncontaminated-enoughfrom trash to meet the requirements of the refuse company, so ever load of recycling actually went to thelandfill!

Leslie Keating inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 2:34 PM

I'm shocked that there isn't already a requirement for businesses and multi-family units. Other than my sharedconcerns that adding an extra layer of bureaucracy by requiring an annual report may cause undo work.Although maybe if we required it for the first three years and phase it out after that time. This would allowtenants of both residential and commercial units to become accustomed to this service. Then if the landlordtook it away at a future date their might be complaints. Overall this has my strong support.

Lynn Schwarz inside Council District 7 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 12:11 PM




I think this is an idea whose time has come. I was surprised that businesses and multi-family dwellings are notalready required to do what residents have done for years.

Robert Argenbright inside Council District 6 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 11:20 AM

I support this ordinance, although I do agree with the comment that the annual report is unnecessary andbureaucratic. I think this part of the recycling program will be easier to enforce than the residential partbecause customers, clients, and tenants will notice if everything is being tossed in the trash.


Salt Lake City should not be in the nanny business, why not enforce the current laws such as noise frommotorcycles, loud car sound systems, stop signs and 25 MPH on 9th south and get the U of U game dayparking off our residential streets. So who is the city trying to give a contract to? Whose relative is it? The cityneeds to get in the business of providing the services that cities provide and not thinking of ways to tax usfurther!

1 Supporter


I support requiring businesses and multi-family units to recycle.

1 Supporter


I support this ordinance except for this provision: "Submit, annually, a copy of recycling collection serviceagreement to the City." This creates unnecessary bureaucracy. Enforcement should be handled by complaint,not paperwork. The manpower and resources to support this part of the ordinance are an unnecessaryexpense.

2 Supporters


I know many residents of multifamily units who are frustrated that they can't recycle. They will welcome thisordinance even if it increases rents by a few dollars.

2 Supporters





Salt Lake City Corporation has truly made recycling easier and convenient for all residents. There should be noreason why businesses and multi-tenant housing shouldn't be held accountable for their waste AND recycling. Ifully support this ordinance.


Yes, I strongly support this.


Yes, yes, and yes. This is great from two different perspectives: city image and sustainability. First, if SLCwants to be viewed as a truly progressive city that cares about our natural resources (i.e., Portland, SanFrancisco, NYC, etc.) , we have to have a mandate like this. There will be a natural resistance fromconservative small businesses and landlords, but those initial road bumps will soon be smoothed over. Peoplethat move to SLC are shocked that this isn't already in place. Secondly, this is necessary to reduce theridiculous amount of waste we toss in our landfill and influence generations of recyclers to come. Please passthis ordinance.

3 Supporters

Mary Richardson inside Council District 5 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 9:07 AM

This is absolutely essential to require businesses and multi-family dwellings to recycle. These are the biggestproducers of waste and the least likely to recycle unless they are required. Please approve this ordinance

4 Supporters

Ross Chambless inside Council District 5 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 8:42 AM

This proposed ordinance is very much needed! As someone who used to rent but had no recycling options, Ialso currently know many renters who currently have no residential recycling options because they live inapartment complexes that simply don't offer it. Requiring a recycling program won't pose a large burden forapartment owners and managers. And because so many city residents continue to live in apartments orcondos, doing this should help the city to continue to significantly reduce its overall waste. However, it isimportant to make sure the educational components of this ordinance to residents is implemented effectively sothat recycling contamination problems (mostly food waste getting mixed in) can be kept to a minimum.

5 Supporters

ILAUNA GURR inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 8:35 AM

I'm all for this. We should have started long ago.




2 Supporters


Great idea. I own a small business and do recycle as much as I can. It is possible to recycle for some smallbusinesses thru the City . I have a blue can and pay $3 or $4 per month to have it picked up weekly. I think I cando this because I am in a mixed use area that has a regular residential pickup but probably couldn't if I wasn'tso this ordinance is needed for the businesses/apartments that do not have this option or don't care. My onlycomplaint about this Open City Hall topic is that as usual, they leave out some very important informationconcerning the recycling program. It is not just a feel good program. There is a very fiscally sound reason fordoing it. One of the objects of the City's recycling program is to significantly extend the life of the landfill. Themore we recycle the longer the landfill will last. Once the landfill is full, the next one will be incredibly expensiveto procure and operate. It won't be in this valley hence it will be a really long way away (Tooele or Juab County ifthey allow it) and will require a huge amount of energy to transport refuse there. If this happens, maybe it couldbe an extension of TRAX to transport the thousands of tons of trash daily hundreds of miles away!

4 Supporters

Jonathan Ramras inside Council District 4 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 8:13 AM

The idea is great however based on discussion with some city sanitation employees there isn't adequateenforcement on current recycling endeavors so how will the city enforce the requirement. There will be addedcosts. Will this be self funded? We need to do it but recognize the effort.

Weston Clark inside Council District 3 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 8:07 AM

I can't imagine any reason why we wouldn't require recycling from businesses and apartments. Beforepurchasing my home I lived in two apartment buildings and even though I wanted to recycle there were nofacilities to do so and it made recycling prohibitively difficult. If businesses and apartments are going to makemoney in our city they should at minimum contribute to our sustainability efforts by recycling. Seems like a nobrainer to me.

2 Supporters


Yes, please! I recycle and compost. My trash bin goes to the street every other month and I would like to makethat even less often. It's appalling to go to a business where the trash cans are full of items that are almostentirely recyclable or to visit a friend in an apartment who tosses everything in the trash because "I can't recyclehere."





It is about time.

1 Supporter

Samantha Moll inside Council District 6 (on forum) November 5, 2013, 7:25 AM

Prove to me that all the recycle is actually being recycled...




ATTACHMENT 3

BUSINESS ADVISORY BOARD LETTER

April 9, 2014 Re: Proposed Business and Multi-Family Recycling Ordinance

Dear Mayor Becker and City Council,

As Salt Lake City’s Business Advisory Board (BAB), we would like to indicate our support for the City’s efforts toward increasing recycling among businesses and multi-family properties. We have reviewed the proposed ordinance for such and discussed it with Debbie Lyons from the City’s Sustainability office at two of our monthly meetings, and desire to pass along a few concerns about the proposal.

1. The waste/recycling needs of businesses and multi-family residences vary greatly. a. BAB recommends splitting the ordinance into two ordinances to separately address

issues between business and multi-family properties. 2. Because of financial concerns, the recycling ordinance appears to be most applicable to new

businesses going forward. a. Therefore, if the implementation of the ordinance causes a financial burden to existing

businesses beyond nominal expenses, it is the BAB’s perspective that existing businesses should be given a roll-out period of e.g. up to five years before full requirements are demanded.

3. The proposed ordinance requires waste generators to submit a recycling plan to the City. a. BAB’s position is that the burden of reporting should not fall upon the shoulders of the

business owners. b. Conversely, reporting could be minimal if there is a check box or simple statement

certifying compliance if such can be filled out with during the regular course of e.g. annual business license renewal.

4. Exemptions to the ordinance are allowed for small waste generators or if it is “infeasible” for the business owner.

a. “Infeasible” may be too narrow of an exemption and/or should be interpreted broadly. b. Regardless, exemptions should at a minimum include considerations about the financial

hardship of implementing the ordinance. 5. BAB’s position is that the program should include incentives to participate in the program,

rather than just a mandate to do so, such as reduced business license fees, hauling fees, etc., including if a full recycling plan is voluntarily submitted.

6. Likewise, we suggest that means to assist with costs to pay for implementing recycling should be made available such as specially designated low-interest loan funds.

Again, we reiterate that we support increasing recycling in the City at large and in the business community. But collectively we assert that costs, burdens, and reporting requirements should be nominal to business owners. Thank you for considering the business perspective in your decisions and we look forward to the community-wide benefits of increased recycling.

Graciously,

Paula Brog, Chair Steve Labrum, Vice-Chair Spencer Lloyd Lucy Cardenas JD Smith Casey McDonough Ryan Corbin John Lair Judy Reese Cullen

ATTACHMENT 4

COMMENTS EMAILED TO SUSTAINABILITY DIVISION

1

Lyons, Debbie

From: Kathy Albury [[email protected]]Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:11 AMTo: Lyons, DebbieSubject: Proposed Ordinance for Non-Residential and Multi-Family Recycling.

Ms. Lyons: As a member of a community the struggles to recycle with considerable cost to us, I urge you to support this program. I know how heartbreaking it is for folks who do not live in communities who care and who are unable to recycle because they have chosen to reduce their carbon footprint by getting rid of their vehicles. It is so hard to get on a bus with a bag of recyclable materials! Kathryn Albury 1411 Utah Street # 17 Salt Lake City, UT 84104

1

Lyons, Debbie

From: Joanna M Straughn [[email protected]]Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 2:42 PMTo: Lyons, DebbieSubject: Multi-family and workplace recycling

Dear Debbie, I participated in the Open House at City Hall and picked up documents related to the proposed recycling changes. I have

read them and strongly support going forward with the proposal. I know many others who have been complaining about this situation and who are very excited that something will be done. It is high time Salt Lake City began universal recycling and enabling renters and employees to recycle wherever they work or live. This will go far to take recyclable materials out of the landfills and divert them into their best possible re‐use. It has been unfair that housing and workplace owners were allowed to deny citizens our rights to recycle which is a responsibility that affects all citizens‐not really related to the workplace or living spaces themselves. I also appreciate the few exemptions for tiny waste streams or for places that develop ways of producing zero waste. Thank you and anyone else who has put a substantial effort into researching the issue and making a proposal for universal recycling in Salt Lake City. Best regards,

Joanna Straughn

Joanna Straughn 1825 Ramona Ave, Apt B Salt Lake City, UT 84108 (801) 718‐7543 Email: [email protected]

1

Lyons, Debbie

From: Carole Straughn [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 5:43 PMTo: Lyons, DebbieSubject: Commercial and multi-family recycling

Hello Debbie, I want urge you to do everything you can to make recycling mandatory for everyone, including businesses and multi-family housing. I support the proposal that is now being considered by city government. Carole Straughn 1964 South 1300 East SLC, UT 84105

1

Lyons, Debbie

From: Mike Christensen [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:13 PMTo: Lyons, DebbieSubject: Proposed Business & Multi-Family Recycling Ordinance

Hi Debbie, Are there examples of recycling programs actually working with multi‐family housing? First of all, I support recycling unequivocally! I have lived in my townhome for over six years. During four of those six years, I served on the home‐owners association board of our 92‐unit complex. We have a total of four six‐cubic‐yard dumpsters for trash, which are emptied twice per week by a private refuse company. Being environmentally minded people, we decided as a board to try converting two of the four dumpsters to mixed‐stream recycling. We tried as best as we could to spread the word in our community by distributing fliers door to door and making announcements in our newsletter. Unfortunately, most residents just kept dumping trash in the dumpsters designated for recycling. The refuse company eventually switched the two recycling dumpsters back to trash dumpsters. During the trial we were never able to produce a load of recycling that was uncontaminated‐enough from trash to meet the requirements of the refuse company, so ever load of recycling actually went to the landfill! So, I’m curious how Salt Lake City plans to actually make this work. Mike Christensen 475 N Redwood Rd Unit 50 Salt Lake City UT 84116‐3767 Email: [email protected] Cell: 801‐361‐2305 Home: 801‐792‐1521 Fax: 801‐326‐4713

Documents

Additional Green Waste and Recycling Containers