Recycling Advisory Committee Meeting

Description

The next meeting of the Recycling Advisory Committee (RAC) is Wednesday June 8th at 8am at City Hall, 795 Mass Ave in the Council Chambers. The draft agenda for this meeting is below. Draft minutes from the May meeting are online.

June 8th, 2016 RAC Meeting Agenda
City Hall, Council Chambers
8am – 9:30am

1. Housekeeping, 8am (10 min)
• Minute Taker
• Public comment
• Approve minutes

2. City Updates, 8:10am (20 min)
• Polystyrene Update
• Schools Update
• Volunteer Opportunities for Summer 2016

3. Discussion Topics, 8:30am (55 min)
• Legislative Update (15 minutes)
• RAC accomplishments and goals check-in (35 minutes)
• Summer Social--end of June? (5 minutes)

4. Closing, 9:25 (5 min)
• Action Plan/Decisions
• Announcements

Committee members are appointed by the City Manager. All meetings are open to the public. Members of the public may speak during the public comment section for up to two minutes. If you wish to speak, please contact John Fitzgerald at 617 349-4849 or jfitzgerald@cambridgema.gov by 1pm the day before the meeting. You may also email, fax or mail written comments for inclusion in public comments in lieu of appearing to speak in person. The Committee Chair must first grant permission to non-members who request to speak at the meeting.

2016 meetings
Held at City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Ave, Council Chambers, 2nd floor, 8:00am

• September 14, 2016
• October 12, 2016
• November 9, 2016
• December 14, 2016


Some RAC Accomplishments (2014-present)
• Recycling in ISD operations
• Reusable bag drive
• Input on BYOB Ordinance
• Input on Polystyrene Ordinance
• Hiring of Outreach Intern
• Paint EPR letter
• Draft letter for H.646

Cambridge Recycling Advisory Committee – Prioritizing Action Items for 2015

POLICY GOAL ACTION ITEM

1. Develop support statement for City to pursue mattress recycling. Explore & research new bulky items to address, such as furniture not in good condition.

2. Issue support statement for paint EPR legislation in MA so it’s ready when the time comes in 2015.

3. Host a roundtable or speaker series on waste reduction, to assist with education and implementation of bag ordinance, possible distribution of rodent-proof trash barrels, and curbside organics. (Invite businesses, farmers markets, church bazaars, residents & seniors. Feedback on yes/no list of what is “trash”.)

4. Ensure pharmaceutical collection options are in Cambridge recycling info. (Better understand extent of non-compliance and environmental hazards. Outreach and education about responsible disposal. More collection spots. Work with Cambridge Health Alliance.)

5. Review City’s efforts on climate protection & net zero to develop include materials management in climate strategy. Work with CPAC to enhance education regarding climate and materials connection - part of PR campaign.

6. Engage City in planning, response & implications for Council order for a report on rodent control operations and the possibility of providing rodent-proof trash barrels to residents (Like Somerville’s new program). Consider 2020/2050 trash and GHG reduction goals and propose short term, more tangible, zero waste goals. (Compare with other zero waste communities. Public acknowledgement of low-waste producers)

OUTREACH GOAL ACTION ITEMS

7. Initiate a conversation with School Dept to make CPS participation in Green Team program stronger & more consistent. Talk to districts that are/aren’t in GT, why and why not? How can high school students/green teams support our outreach goals in the schools and in the community at large? Define scope of the partnership. (Just high school? tap into existing students groups and/or recruit volunteers? Training to do outreach)

8. Assist City with more regular outreach to large multifamily buildings (face time, calls, info packets). Brainstorm incentives. Publicize BB performance more. Conduct surveys of attitudes/awareness. (Promote by building or area. Something fun to capture attention. Brainstorm incentives, competition. Should focus be on landlords, property managers with private trash collection, emphasizing savings of recycling?

9. Support organics outreach and program expansion. Promote large multifamily organics/composting. Publicize drop-off locations more. (How does fit into curbside pilot? Help identify appropriate hosts for new drop-off locations in East Cambridge, West Cambridge and Cambridgeport.)

10. Review and discuss DPW recycling outreach budget in detail - RAC evaluate existing past & future efforts. How can City use professional marketing, probono or paid? What opportunities exist to leverage more? Develop outreach goals & 5R City media campaign similar to “Tree City USA”. (Identify resources to help leverage existing RAC volunteer time while providing professional expertise. Develop a framework for assessing value and costs associated with such partnerships/contracts and make recommendations for which ones to use.

BUSINESS GOAL ACTION ITEMS

11. Review and recommend changes to Recycling Ordinance and Commercial Recycling Rules and Regulations.

12. Review and follow-up on Business Recycling Recommendations presented to the commissioners in June 2014. (Letter to the commissioner for extra staff or ISD assistance. Second meeting. Prioritize recommendations and apply SMART goal framework.)



H. 646 Massachusetts Bill: Elimination of bottle deposit program

Dear Owen,

The RAC opposes Massachusetts Bill H.646, which proposes the elimination of the existing bottle deposit system, and the addition of responsibilities to municipalities, for the following reasons:
• Municipalities already do more than their share in managing consumer product waste. They provide access to comprehensive recycling to about 80% of Mass. households. Many municipalities lack the staff to pursue and administer competitive grants such as those proposed in this bill.
• The current Bottle Bill presumes that producers, retailers, and consumers take responsibility for recycling covered bottles and cans, mandating their redemption no matter what the value of the commodity.

Elimination of the bottle deposit system would add significant amounts of glass to our recycling streams, which are becoming increasingly costly to manage. Much of the “sorted” glass from Single Stream is too contaminated for glass recyclers to make into new glass. Already $30/ton, adding more glass to Single Stream Recycling will drive up the costs even more. This material is best kept separate, as it is in the deposit system, where it has the most value.

We propose more study of the impacts of this bill before contemplating elimination of the Bottle Bill, which Bill H.646 would effectively do:
• How much would it cost to establish effective recycling programs that do not rely principally on municipal governments?
• Would the amount appropriated be distributed effectively enough, without mandates for implementation in the private sector (as proposed in H.3420), to create the needed infrastructure changes for both collection and processing to achieve the high recovery rate the current deposit-redemption system does?
• What if Bill H.646 is passed, and is found to be ineffective? There is no mechanism to measure its efficacy, or to bring back the current redemption system in that case.
For the above reasons, the RAC recommends that the City of Cambridge oppose Bill H.646.

Sincerely,
Debby Galef and Meera Singh
For the Recycling Advisory Committee