03/26/25 08 AM: Recycling Subsidy Review, Glass Costs; Privatization Eyed
Recycling Subsidy Review, Glass Costs; Privatization Eyed
County staff analyzed $653K recycling subsidy origins, high contamination, misalignment with waste reduction priorities; discussed privatization via service ordinance like Mason County. Glass recycling costs $138K/year ($6/ton); unanimously rejected tipping fee hike, prioritizing bottle bill advocacy. No action on subsidy; draft ordinance for future workshop.
Recycling Program Subsidy Analysis
Metadata
- Time Range: 01:01:00–01:28:00 (PART 1)
- Categories: budgeting, operations, services, planning
Summary
Staff presented data on the county's recycling subsidy, tracing its origins to a 1971 ad campaign shifting responsibility to municipalities, with current two-year costs of approximately $653,000 after grants ($241,600 from Department of Ecology) and commodity sales ($322,000). Contamination rates remain high despite $70,000 spent in 2022, and the Solid Waste Management Plan prioritizes waste reduction and reuse over recycling, yet funding favors recycling. Options discussed include maintaining the $13.89 per ton tipping fee subsidy or privatizing via a minimum level of service ordinance modeled on Mason and other counties, to be drafted for a future workshop.
Key Discussion Points
- Staff detailed subsidy calculation: $13.89 out of every $171 tipping fee goes to recycling; grant covers three months, commodity sales include glass.
- Contamination rates increased after 2022 efforts; garbage bags dropped at unstaffed sites like Quilcene and Port Ludlow.
- Solid Waste Management Plan lists priorities as reduce, reuse, then recycle, but spending misaligns.
- Potential cost reductions: cut solid waste education, food waste diversion to food banks, low-income discount, IDD employment, public health illegal dumping assistance, Quilcene drop box ($40,000 loss), household hazardous waste events, artist residency ($200/year).
- Privatization mechanics: draft ordinance for UTC hauler (e.g., Waste Connections) to provide bundled garbage/recycling service at rates like $31.93/month for 60-gallon every other week plus recycling.
- Customer survey showed $31.07 average minimum fee tolerance matching UTC rates; 3% of transactions are curbside.
- Charging for self-haul recycling discussed but rejected due to queue congestion at scales (25-40% of customers).
Public Comments
- No distinct public comments; discussion among BOCC, SWAC members, and staff.
Supporting Materials Referenced
- No supporting materials provided for analysis. Solid Waste Management Plan (Chapter 1 goals), Mason County level of service ordinance, UTC tariff rates, and 2022 contamination data referenced but not provided.
Financials
- Two-year recycling costs: $653,000 (includes $241,600 Ecology grant, $322,000 commodity sales, labor, education, admin).
- Annual subsidy: $13.89 per ton (annual tons divided by program costs).
- Potential cuts total near recycling costs, short by $14,000–$16,000.
- UTC bundled rates: 60-gallon EOWG + EOWR = $31.93/month; customer survey average $31.07 minimum fee.
Alternatives & Amendments
- Charge for recycling at scales or volume-to-weight conversion (e.g., $5–$10 per load): rejected due to congestion, rerouting challenges.
- Pave/staff Hatlock or Quilcene for hauler use: considered for service equity but shifted to self-haul on unserviced roads paying per ton.
- No alternatives discussed for plan amendment.
Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps
- Decision: No action taken; staff to draft minimum level of service ordinance/resolution for workshop review.
- Vote: None held.
- Next Steps:
- Staff bring draft ordinance to BOCC workshop within three months ahead of Skookum contract end (April 1, 2026).
- Joint BOCC-SWAC meeting scheduled soon (24-hour notice) for further discussion.
Glass Recycling Handling
Metadata
- Time Range: 01:28:00–02:01:08 (PART 1)
- Categories: budgeting, operations, services
Summary
Staff outlined glass recycling challenges after Seattle market collapse, with Portland as sole outlet costing ~$65,000/year transport plus revenue loss and labor/equipment ($138,311 total annual cost, or $6/ton on 23,725 tons). Glass now generates revenue but represents 3% inert/non-toxic waste stream; alternatives like grinding to sand ruled out due to costs vs. real sand at $15/ton and contamination. Staff recommended against $6 tipping fee increase, prioritizing low-income access and advocating bottle bill (SB 5502 died; EPR SB 5284 pending); group unanimously agreed.
Key Discussion Points
- Transport estimates average $65,000/year; total cost $138,311/year or $6/ton (vs. $97.25/ton landfill).
- Glass CO2 reduction costs $440/metric ton (worst value); public perception skewed by historical markets (1971–2017).
- Ellensburg grinding/pulverizing not viable due to capital costs, contamination (e.g., TVs, scuba tanks), competing sand market.
- Aligns with EPR/bottle bill push; WSAC LSC resistant without constituent pressure.
- Education emphasized to shift from "Keep America Beautiful" legacy to reduce/reuse priorities.
Public Comments
- Tracy: Support staff recommendation; continue education, await legislative fixes like bottle bill.
- Rebecca (SWAC): Public upset due to skewed perceptions; need data-driven communication.
- Sierra: Broader education on recycling realities; no tipping fee increase.
- Heather: Strengthen education on reduce/reuse; community ready.
- New attendee: Asked about Ellensburg grinding facility.
Supporting Materials Referenced
- No supporting materials provided for analysis. 2022 CO2 metrics, transport estimates, and market data referenced but not provided.
Financials
- Annual costs: $138,311 ($65,000 transport average of two estimates, revenue loss, labor/equipment).
- Per ton: $5.83 ($6 with rounding) on 23,725 tons; landfill $97.25/ton vs. Portland $81.34/ton.
- Sand market: $0.15/ton.
Alternatives & Amendments
- Ship to Portland: adds $6/ton, burdens low-income.
- Pulverize to sand (local or Ellensburg): high capital, cleaning costs, contamination unviable vs. $0.15/ton sand.
- No amendments discussed.
Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps
- Decision: "Public works recommend against increasing the tipping fee to fund glass recycling and their continued advocacy from the BOCC, WSAC Legislative Steering Committee representative for a bottle bill such as the current EPR bill whose companion was 5502."
- Vote: Unanimous (all in room and online in favor; no nays or abstentions; motioned by Greg, seconded).
- Next Steps:
- Continue advocacy for bottle bill/EPR (SB 5284).
- Schedule additional joint BOCC-SWAC meeting before April 24 SWAC agenda (coordinate dates/rooms via Carolyn).
Background Materials
Contents
AI Information
- Model: x-ai/grok-4.1-fast
- Generated On: Sun, Nov 23, 05:51 PM
- Prompt: 2d61ab9ed6ab67b1e564826a21c0f390103298111f1d22342798ab4f3d6c0974