The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01/27/2004 Urban Affairs Advisory Minutes 1-27-2004 Page 1 of 3 URBAN AFFAIRS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2004 1 CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Urban Affairs Committee was called to order by Chair Shirley Doering at 7.00 p.m. Members Present: Barry Berg, Sandy Breuer, Shirley Doenng, Shelley Madore, Sharon Schwartz and Pam Sohlberg Members Absent: Robin Curran. Staff Present: Susan Bast, Recycling Coordinator; Kathy Bodmer, Assistant Planner; Mike Hammerstad, Code Enforcement Officer; Tim Miller, Code Enforcement Officer Guests present: Ron Moemng and Mike Trulsan, Waste Management; Craig Seim, BFI, Bill Morris and Peter Leatherman, Decision Resources. 2 APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION Shelley Madore moved, seconded by Sharon Schwartz, to approve the agenda adding a discussion item to provide a report of a recycling facility tour The motion carned unanimously 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 2003 MOTION Sharon Schwartz moved, seconded by Shelley Madore to approve the minutes of the September 23, 2003 meeting. The motion carried unanimously 4 DISCUSSION ITEM RECYCLING FACILITY TOUR Shelley Madore and Sharon Schwartz reported that they had taken a tour of the Waste Management recycling facility m Minneapolis with the Mayor and Sue Bast. They described to the group how the recyclables were processed. Sharon noted that air, gravity and magnets are used to separate the materials. Shelley described how other items are separated by individual workers by hand off of a conveyor belt. Shirley asked whether the facility accepts materials from other companies, or whether it is only available to Waste Management. Ron Moemng, Waste Management, said that the facility accepts some recyclable from third parties. Shelley talked about the recent article m the Star Tribune that discussed the single container recycling system that is being implemented by Waste Management m various cities m the Twin Cities area. Barry Berg noted that it is difficult for smaller haulers to compete with Waste Management because the cost of constructing these types of facilities is very expensive. Ron Moemng stated that the "single sort" recycling program provides collection twice monthly He http.//www ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/urban affairs/2004/01-27-04.htm 4/28/2009 Urban Affairs Advisory Minutes 1-27-2004 Page 2 of 3 stated that some communities need to amend their ordinances m order to allow recycling collection less frequently than once weekly WASTE MANAGEMENT REFUSE SURVEY RESULTS Bill Morris, Decision Resources, presented the results of the Waste Management Refuse Survey to the Committee. He explained that the telephone interviews were conducted in August 2003 and lasted an average of 18 minutes each. He stated that by interviewing 400 residents in Apple Valley, his company's findings would reflect the opinion of the residents in Apple Valley within an error rate of ~ 5%. He stated that the survey found in general that residents were very adamant about what they liked and what they didn't like. The survey found that 91% of the residents say that they recycle, with 83% stating that they do it weekly Bill commented that this is a "halo" question, which means that because people know that they should recycle, they are more likely to answer in the affirmative, resulting m higher participation numbers than what might actually be taking place (upward bias) In terms of what might increase recycling, "not having to separate recyclables" was a fairly strong response. Seventy-four percent (74%) of the residents stated that they received their recycling and garbage information from the City Newsletter Bill Morns noted that of the information sources listed, the City's website came in with a fairly low response rate. Seventy-two. percent (72%) of the residents say they place their containers next to the garage, while 28% place it someplace else. Of those who place their container someplace else, 80% do it for the benefit of the hauler Awareness of the ordinance was high, with 80% of the respondents stating that they were aware of the ordinance requirements. Bill Moms noted that the highest number of those who were unaware of the ordinance resided in the southeast quadrant of the City Next, the interviewers asked respondents whether they favored maintaining the present ordinance. Sixty- one percent (61%) favored rnaintaimng it, while 25% wanted it changed. Bill noted that those not currently placing their garbage at the garage opposed the ordinance. He also noted that women tended to favor the existing ordinance, while more men wanted the ordinance changed. Next the interviewers presented the residents with a list of arguments for and against the door side collection ordinance. Bill stated that most of those who were interviewed agreed with the arguments, both for and against the ordinance. After being presented with the arguments for and against the ordinance, the residents were asked again whether they supported or opposed the door- side collection requirement. Bill noted that the net shift from the first time the question was asked to the second time was miniscule; most respondents did not change their position after heanng the arguments. When asked whether the residents would support a single collection day in a neighborhood, 64% of the respondents supported the idea. The next serves of questions asked what type of hauler options the residents preferred. The survey mentioned three options (1) the City could contract with a single hauler to collect for the whole City; (2) one hauler could be selected to collect from a designated zone; or (3) the City could make no change to the current open hauling system. Bill stated that many respondents responded intensely that the system should remain an open hauling system. Sixty-six percent (66%) of the respondents said they wanted no change. He said the intense response is consistent with what he has found m most communities rn the Twin Cities. Bill Morris summarized the survey results by saying that the telephone survey found that the current door side collection ordinance has a good deal of support from residents. In fact, residents support the http.//www ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/urban affairs/2004/01-27-04.htm 4/28/2009 Urban Affairs Advisory Minutes 1-27-2004 Page 3 of 3 ordinance at a ratio of 2 to 1 He also stated that a key finding from the survey was that people's opinion of the ordmance Zs firmly held. That's why there was tittle shift m the respondent's feeling about the ordinance after being presented with arguments for and against it. Lastly, Bill stated that there appears to be good support for one collection day within a neighborhood. Sharon Schwartz noted that in the 2000 survey, 72.8% of the respondents said they were aware of the ordmance, while the new Decision Resources found that now 80% of the respondents were aware of rt. The Committee wondered whether sending out surveys helped to educate people about the ordinance requirements. Kathy Bodmer asked whether awareness of the ordinance could be considered a "halo" question similar to recycling activity Bill Morris answered no - he would not expect an upward bias with this question. The Committee stated the City should use the most effective information sources available, including the Crty Newsletter, to educate residents about the refuse collection ordmance The Committee discussed issues regarding the enforcement of the ordinance. Sharon Schwartz stated that she has never liked the way the enforcement provisions in the ordinance were wntten, and that rt is unenforceable in its present form. MOTION Pam Sohlberg moved, seconded by Shelley Madore to make the following motion. "As a result of the Decision Resources Telephone Survey, the Urban Affairs Committee proposes to undertake a review of the City's Refuse Collection Ordinance. The Committee wishes to review how to enhance the enforcement of the door-side collection requirement and explore how to implement day-certain collection m the City "Motion carried unanimously 5 OTHER BUSINESS Staff informed the Committee that the City Council has directed the Committee to review the City's Natural Resources Management Ordinance to determine whether the City can prohibit a resident from cutting down trees on his or her private property Legal staff and the City's Natural Resources Coordinator will be at the next meeting to discuss this item. 6 ADJOURNMENT MOTION Shelley moved, seconded by Sandy Breuer to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8 45 p.m. http.//www ci.apple-valley.mn.us/Minutes/urban affairs/2004/01-27-04.htm 4/28/2009