MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

Wednesday, January 19, 2000

Council Chamber

Members Present:  Ed Washington (Chair), Rod Park

Members Absent:  Susan McLain (Vice Chair)

Others Present:    David Bradgon (Presiding Officer)

Chair Washington called the meeting to order at 1:35 PM. He announced that Councilor McLain was absent as she was in Cuba as a debate coach with her school’s debating team.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 1999

2.  REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR’S UPDATE

Terry Petersen, Acting Director of the Regional Environmental Management Department, gave a summary of the department’s recent activities. (The summary is attached to the meeting record.) Items included the following:

•  The REM department was seeking permits to use riprap to repair a section of the dike at the St. John’s landfill. Assuming all goes well, construction should begin this summer.

Chair Washington asked if the riprap would be similar to that used on the coast to build jetties. Mr. Petersen said it would be similar, but the rock would not be as large. Some of the rock would be visible above the water line, but not much.

Jim Watkins, Manager of Engineering and Analysis, REM, said the riprap would come up to the normal level of the slough but not up the bank. It would be a graduated rock filter that gets larger as it goes out. He said most of it would be under water.

Chair Washington asked if the riprap would prevent future erosion.

Mr. Watkins said that was the purpose of using graduated rock. The fine rock would keep the sediment on the back side. He said this approach was not perfect, but it was the best available at this time. He said an experimental approach would be tried whereby sand is injected between the rocks, then seeded to try to revegetate the area.

•  Metro Central Enhancement committee met on Wednesday, January 25, to begin evaluating grant applications for enhancement money available at Metro Central.

•  The annual transfer station survey has been completed. Results are similar to those in the past, and indicate people are generally satisfied with the service. Questions about self-haul indicate that people opt to do that when they have a lot of debris. Mr. Petersen said that indicates more education is needed to inform people of the services that are available curbside. He said it would be desirable to route as much waste through commercial haulers as possible.

Councilor Park asked whether the need for improving the self-haul unloading area would remain the same if more waste were routed through commercial haulers.

Mr. Petersen said that the need would be less but it would still there, because a large percentage of the self-haulers were small businesses and remodelers. They need the service regardless.

Councilor Park asked about a possible conflict between the long lines of customers seen in aerial photos of the facility and reports of customer satisfaction. Mr. Petersen said the survey was not done on one of those long-line days; those days are not common. The survey was done on a more typical day.

Councilor Park asked if the department had information on the size of load of self-haul customers. He asked if the department had cost comparisons on disposing of the same amount of debris through curbside as opposed to renting a dumpster or self-haul. He noted that it costs as much to service a small account as it does a large account. He suggested that spending the money to improve the self-haul area might not be the most cost-effective way of addressing that need.

Chair Washington asked if the department conducted this extensive a survey more than once a year.

Mr. Petersen said no, but that customer comment cards are passed out year-round.

•  Metro will begin selling recycled latex paint through the Rebuilding Center for $22 for a five-gallon bucket. He noted the Center would soon move to the 300 block of N. Mississippi.

•  Waste Management has planned to improve the recycling capacity of its Wastech facility on Columbia in No. Portland.

•  The REM department recently hired Michelle Adams as the new assistant to the Director.

•  A new residential recycling campaign began on Sunday, January 16, 2000, designed to remind residential customers of the variety of items that can be recycled curbside.

Mr. Petersen introduced Ms. Kolberg and Ms. O’Dell, who would give a short update on the residential recycling campaign.

Vicky Kolberg, Outreach and Education Supervisor, REM, said the purpose of the campaign is to increase the number of people who recycle and the amount that is recycled. The campaign’s approach adapts the competitive message of typical campaigns for athletic events and apparel, to promote recycling. She said a post-campaign survey would be conducted to gauge success. In addition, fun, participatory public relations events would be held at various locations and events, in partnership with area radio stations.

Jan O’Dell, Senior Public Affairs Specialist, REM, added that the campaign was aimed at the entire region. She played two radio spots. (The spots can be heard on the audiotapes of this meeting.) She said print ads have been sent to a broad range of newspapers region-wide. (A sample of one of the print ads has been attached to the meeting record.)

3.  REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE’S WORK PLAN

Chair Washington said he had requested that Mr. Petersen put together a work plan from the department so the committee could evaluate the major issues for this year.

Mr. Petersen distributed to the committee a brief summary of the REM department’s proposed work for the year 2000. He said the list focused on projects that either involved public policy or high costs. (The list is attached to the meeting record.) The projects have been grouped according to priority (high, medium, and low), but within those groups they are listed by date. He noted that the dates are approximate, with work probably occurring both before and after that.

Mr. Petersen emphasized that the list does not reflect large, overarching goals, such as waste-reduction. It lists projects.

Councilor Park said he would like to see those issues that relate to recycling (#5 and #7, for example) higher priorities for policy discussions.

Chair Washington asked about #9, the Washington County Landfill Regulations.

Mr. Petersen said two landfills lie outside the Metro boundary in Washington County. Metro has agreements with them but does not regulate them directly. The County would like for Metro to play a larger role in directly regulating those landfills. He said Metro would need to study the situation thoroughly before assuming more responsibility out there.

Chair Washington asked about #4, the Hazardous Waste Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (RSWMP) Update. Mr. Petersen said the update would take place through an ordinance. He noted that within the priority categories, the projects are listed by month, not by order of priority.

Chair Washington said for the coming year, each member of the committee would be assigned to specialize in one of the high-priority projects, as they all move through the list. The department would then be able to work with one Councilor who knows about the issue in depth.

4.  REVIEW OF DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 00-844 RELATING TO CONVERTING THE EXCISE TAX ON GARBAGE TO A PER-TON FEE

Marvin Fjordbeck, Senior Assistant Legal Counsel, explained that the draft ordinance would change the way the excise tax is collected on garbage, from a percentage of revenues to a per-ton charge. The ordinance reflects a tiered rate structure. A consumer price index adjustment has also been included, which would go into effect in July of this year. He said the final part of the ordinance was still under study, to ensure that it does not run against the rule against prospective delegation by the Council. Other means exist to accomplish the same goal—i.e., to ensure that the amount of the tax is revisited and adjusted to the level of the market.

Chair Washington opened a public hearing on Draft Ordinance No. 00-844 at 2:22 PM. No one came forward to testify, so he closed the public hearing.

Councilor Park asked if converting the 8% fee to a charge of $5.02/ton would create a different level of taxation at Metro facilities versus non-Metro facilities.

Mr. Fjordbeck said the same tax would be the same at all facilities, regardless of ownership.

Mr. Petersen said the $5.02/ton charge was set to keep the amount of money collected the same as what is currently collected based on a percentage of the revenue. The ordinance, however, does specify credits for dry waste and the residual from the material recovery facilities (MRFs), creating an effective, three-tiered rate structure—one for wet waste at transfer stations, one for dry waste at limited-purpose landfills, and one for the residual out of MRFs.

Councilor Park asked if Mr. Fjordbeck had investigated the legality of imposing a tiered rate.

Mr. Fjordbeck said he believed a tiered rate based on recycling would be legal. He had not investigated it because he did believe it was necessary.

Councilor Park asked about the perception that might exist among some members of the public that Metro might have a disincentive to encourage recycling, as the more that is recycled, the less money Metro collects. He suggested that the excise tax amount be related to the level of the recycling rate—i.e., when more is recycled, the excise tax would go up. This would remove the possibility that Metro could be perceived as reducing its efforts to recycle because it needed money to operate. It also makes it clear to the public that the recycling effort costs money. He said there is a common perception that when people recycle more, it saves money. Although that is true in the long run, that is not true in the short term.

Mr. Petersen asked if his understanding was correct, that Councilor Park was suggesting that the Council adopt a methodology for determining the tax charge, not an actual dollar amount.

Councilor Park said that was correct. The focus would shift to how much money would be needed to accomplish Metro’s goals. He suggested soliciting feedback from Metro and from the industry on this idea.

Mr. Petersen said the department was in the process of updating its financial analysis. He promised to provide a copy to Councilor Park. He said the department likes the education message that recycling saves money in the long run, and it would like to get that message out to the public. He said the unit price might go up when more material is recycled, but if there are fewer units the total cost is less.

Chair Washington opened a public hearing again at 2:35 PM on this ordinance, to allow member of the public to comment now that the committee had had a chance to discuss the issue.

Tim Raphael, Celilo Group, Waste Management, Inc., suggested that Councilor Park’s floating excise fee might act as a disincentive for facilities to increase materials recovery, as if they did, they would be charged more.

Councilor Park said that perhaps some adjustment would need to be made to compensate for that. He said he had suggested the idea to decouple Metro’s mission to encourage recycling with its own financial well being.

Mr. Raphael said that the draft ordinance on its face seems to work against the idea. He said he would look forward to working more on the idea toward accomplishing what Councilor Park would like to accomplish. He said Metro clearly needs to address the issue that the more it succeeds in recycling the less money it gets.

Chair Washington closed the public hearing at 2:40 PM.

Councilor Park asked if there was a deadline for passing this ordinance.

Mr. Fjordbeck said the only date of significance would be that for a change to be effective at the beginning of the next fiscal year, it would need to be made by the end of March. The only other consideration would be an administrative request that any change go into effect at the beginning of a month.

Chair Washington asked Councilor Park to work with staff and the legal department to flesh this issue out. He asked for input from members of the industry on this ordinance. He said barring unforeseen occurrences, this ordinance should be passed before the March 31 deadline.

5.  DISCUSSION OF EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR THE RFP FOR DISPOSAL OF TEN PERCENT OF THE REGION’S WASTE STREAM

Mr. Petersen asked for the committee’s suggestions on what criteria should be used to evaluate proposals for waste to be sent to a landfill other than Waste Management’s. He read part of Section 5, “Waste Flow Guarantees,” of the current contract with Waste Management (attached to the meeting record). He explained the criteria, such as costs for transport, transfer, and disposal (the criteria are also attached to the meeting record) and key assumptions under which the department had been working. One key assumption was that it would be important to state the term of the contract in the RFP. The department has suggested seven years as an appropriate term, which the industry has indicated would be the minimum amount of time necessary to make capital improvements. Another key assumption was

Mr. Petersen said the department had not weighted very heavily the criterion relating to increasing competition, as it felt competition was adequate among available landfills and it would be difficult to make any headway toward improving competition in collection.

Councilor Parks asked Mr. Petersen to explain why competitiveness might be encouraged in one area but not another—for example, why it might be encouraged it in organics recovery but not collection.

Mr. Petersen said the difference lay in materials recovery rather than collection. Materials recovery might be weighted because it is one of Metro’s goals. Mr. Petersen emphasized that the ranking came through discussion with a SWAC advisory committee, not by a formal vote at SWAC. He asked the committee for its feedback on the criteria the committee thought were most important and their rankings.

Councilor Park said he thought that SWAC had been confused about some of the definitions when discussing these criteria. He suggested that the issue be taken back to SWAC with clearer definitions, for a recount.

Mr. Petersen said it would be more helpful to take a draft of the RFP to the advisory committee, as the RFP would have the information the industry would like to see. He suggested obtaining the committee’s general direction now. Then drafting the RFP be drafted and taking it to SWAC for discussion.

Chair Washington asked what method would be used to weight competitiveness, with the REM department giving it no weight and the SWAC committee ranking it #5.

Mr. Petersen said that if encouraging competition were considered important, the committee could give a company other than Waste Management extra points.

Councilor Park asked about the competition. He suggested that Metro had established the 10% set-aside at an earlier time, when there were fewer solid waste landfills.

Mr. Petersen said that was a major factor when this was set up ten years ago. He said that was why the department was suggesting not giving any weight to the competition criterion. He suggested it would not have much effect on the competitive arena. He said another reason was to provide flexibility by not awarding 100% of the contract to one company.

Councilor Park asked if there was any difference in fiscal impact on the system between this 10% set-aside and diverting 10% through recycling.

Mr. Petersen said Metro would collect its regional system fee and its excise tax on this 10%, regardless of which landfill it goes to, but not on that diverted through recycling. The similarity comes in that both would increase the disposal price and the price related to the transfer station operating contract, as both of those prices were based on quantity.

Councilor Park said that ratepayers elsewhere in the system would, in both cases, need to make up the difference in dollars.

Chair Washington asked Mr. Petersen to discuss the fiscal impacts of this issue with Councilor Park later, and also with Councilor McLain after she returns.

6.  COUNCILOR COMMUNICATIONS

There being no further business before the committee, Chair Washington adjourned the meeting at 3:04 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Pat Emmerson

Council Assistant

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF JANUARY 19, 2000

Testimony Cards

Tim Raphael, Celilo Group, Waste Management, Inc.