HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2015/08/03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA
MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL
Monday, August 3, 2015
7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Gunn, Hull, Meehlhause, Mueller
PUBLIC COMMENT
Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your
full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes.
Agenda Items Discussed by Consensus
1. Ramsey County Road 10, County Road H and I-35 W Interchange Project
2. Update on Volunteer Program
3. Review Proposed Code Requirements regarding Bees
4. Review Legal Services Agreement
5. Discuss Options Associated with Pursuing Organized Collection
Next Work Session: TUESDAY, September 8, 2015, at 7pm
Next City Council Meeting: Monday, August 10, 2015, at 7pm
Item No. 1.
Meeting Date: August 3, 2015
Type of Business: Work Session
City Administrator Review: ______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Brian Erickson, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer
Item Title/Subject: Ramsey County Road 10, County Road H and I-35W
Interchange Project
Introduction/Background
Ramsey County is in the process of a significant improvement program along the I-35W corridor
in the 2015 and 2016 construction seasons. For Mounds View, the improvements planned for
County Road 10, County Road H and I-35W will have the largest impact going forward.
Throughout the planning and design phase Mounds View has been included in the process as a
member of the Project Management Team (PMT). The PMT also includes technical staff from
Mn/DOT, FHWA, Arden Hills, Metro Transit, RCWD and several engineering consultants.
At the Work Session on December 1, 2014, Beth Engum, Ramsey’s County’s Project Manager
along with the previous Public Works Director, Nick DeBar, discussed the extent of this project.
During that discussion, Ms. Engum provided the Council with an overview of the planned
improvements including updates on Highway 96, TCAAP infrastructure improvements and the
Rice Creek Remeander project. On April 6, 2015, Ramsey County returned to Council to
discuss the updated layout that was prepared. This revision was made in order to address
concerns from local business regarding the proposed closure of Clifton Drive to left turns out
onto County Road H.
Discussion
Since the April Work Session, the layout for this project has been refined based on input from
the City and business owners. This revision now includes roundabouts on both the east and
west sides of I-35W. The western roundabout provides a solution which allows for access to I-
35W without requiring a difficult u-turn. Additionally, Ramsey County has updated budget
information for the project which will be provided at the work session.
On August 24, 2015, Ramsey County will be seeking municipal consent regarding this project.
In general, Ramsey County follows Mn/DOT’s municipal consent process used when performing
their road projects. As part of the municipal consent request, a public hearing has been
scheduled to allow for City Council to hear comments from the public at large. Staff has sent
letters to area business and property owners with information regarding both the work session
and upcoming public hearing.
The goals for this discussion are to provide Council with an update on the status of the project,
answer questions regarding the revised layout and municipal consent process, present budget
information and discuss possible city amenities to be included in the project. Amenities could
include such items as decorative lighting, an entrance ‘monument’ or other aesthetic features.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brian Erickson, P.E.
Item No: 2
Meeting Date: August 3, 2015
Type of Business: Work Session
City Administrator Review: _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree Crane, Assistant City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Mounds View Volunteer Program Update
Introduction:
Minnesota Association for Volunteer Administration (MAVA) is an alliance of individuals
and networks dedicated to providing support and resources to those who lead
volunteers. On September 8, 2014, the City was awarded a grant from MAVA, in the
amount of $2,000, to start the process in establishing a City Volunteer Program.
Discussion:
I wanted to update the City Council on what the City has done thus far in starting the
process of establishing a City Volunteer Program:
• Receptionist/Recycling Coordinator Mary Springer and I have attended a
number of training sessions sponsored by MAVA to learn about
establishing a volunteer program. In May, Mary Springer and I attended
the MAVA Conference. At this conference, there were workshops on
administration and management of a volunteer program.
• Mary Springer and I have been working with Cable Television Coordinator
Vanessa Van Alstine to brainstorm ideas on a Volunteer PSA, which
would be aired on the City’s cable channel, YouTube, website and
Facebook. I have attended each Mounds View Commission Meeting in
March and April to solicit volunteers as talent for this PSA. Staff is just
starting work on a script for this PSA.
• Mary and I have also been working with the cities of Roseville, Inver
Grove Heights and West St. Paul to solicit ideas on volunteer
opportunities. Our next step is establishing a volunteer program website
on the City’s website. Attached is draft of the Mounds View Volunteer
Program and Volunteer application. It is Staff’s intention to launch the
volunteer program on Tuesday, August 4, 2015, on the City’s website. In
addition, an article will be written in the next Mounds View Matters in
regard to this program.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________
Desaree Crane
Mounds View Volunteer Program
Make a Difference - Volunteer!
Thank you for considering working as a volunteer! The City is excited to offer a variety
of volunteer opportunities to support the Mounds View community. Are you looking for a
1 day event? How about a long term opportunity? Do you want to work outside? Maybe
you have excellent organizational skills? We may just have the right fit for you!
Why Volunteer?
When you volunteer, your efforts strengthen the local services available to members of
the community. Volunteering raises awareness of important social needs, connects
communities and builds friendships. Change your life and those around you -- volunteer!
• Develop new skills
• Enhance your resume
• Feel good about giving back to the community
• Share your talents
Volunteer Benefits:
• Enriches city programs and services through volunteer involvement and
participation
• Facilitates active partnerships between city staff and community members
• Helps citizens become more familiar with city programs, services and issues
• Provides unique opportunities for local residents to contribute to city government
General Opportunities
Adopt a Hydrant, Neighborhood, or Park
• Hydrant (keep snow away during the winter months)
• Neighborhood (pick up trash and debris all year round)
• Park (pick up trash and debris all year round)
City Events / Short Term Opportunities
• Mounds View Festival in the Park
Code Enforcement
• Check on vacant properties as assigned
Data Entry
• Projects as assigned
Document Imager
• Provide assistance with the preparation and/or scanning of official city records for
electronic preservation
Facility Support
• Cleaning
• Other projects as agreed upon
• Painting
• Room Set Up or Take Down
• Sweeping / Vacuuming
• Window Washing
Garden / Landscaping Assistance
• Help maintain gardens and landscaping around City buildings, boulevards,
parks, etc.
• Mulching
• Planting and watering
• Raking
• Weeding
Invasive Plant Removal
• Help the City remove invasive buckthorn, and other invasive species
• Identify areas needing attention
Interpreter / Translator
• Assist residents with paperwork
• Help city staff communicate with Limited English Proficiency residents
• Meet or speak with residents to help explain city services, codes and answer
questions
• Translate written materials, such as brochures, letters and flyers, into other
languages
Mounds View Television
• Write scripts for programming
• Assist Cable Television Coordinator in special projects
• Be talent on programming as assigned
Group Opportunities
Opportunities for area businesses, churches, civic groups, etc. to participate as a group
can be explored by emailing desareec@ci.mounds-view.mn.us or by calling 763-717-
4000. Typically groups will do a park clean up, planting project, invasive plant removal,
or assist with a special event.
VOLUNTEER APPLICATION
Name: __________________________________________________________
Address: _________________________________________________________
Phone: _______________________________
City: ____________________________________ State:_______________
Zip: ___________________________
Email: __________________________________________________________
In case of an emergency, please contact:
Emergency Contact Name: _______________________________
Relationship: __________________________
Day Phone:_________________________________
Evening Phone:____________________________________
Skills & Interests
In which of the skills listed below do you feel you have moderate to excellent skill?
Check all that apply. If you are interested in working in a park, please indicate any and
all parks you would be interested in assisting with.
Other Skills/Interest _______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Code Enforcement Customer Service Data Entry
Database Management Document Imaging Translator
Grounds Maintenance Natural Habitat
Restoration Out-going phone calls
Park
Beautification/Gardening Photography Mounds View TV
Public Speaking Reception Social Media
Special Events Adopt Hydrant/Park Traffic Control
Volunteer Management Working with kids Writing
Additional Languages
What languages, in addition to English do you speak and/or write.
Additional
Languages: American Sign
Language Hmong Spanish
Somali Spanish Thai
OTHER
If you marked other
please specify:
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Availability
Please indicate the days, times and approximate number of hours you are usually
available to volunteer.
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Morning: Afternoon: Evening:
References:
Name: _____________________ Name: ____________________
Address: _____________________ Address: ____________________
_____________________ ____________________
Phone: _____________________ Phone: ____________________
Name: _____________________ Name: ____________________
Address: _____________________ Address: ____________________
_____________________ ____________________
Phone: _____________________ Phone: ____________________
I Agree:
• I am interested in volunteering my services to the community and understand I
will not be an employee of the City of Mounds View .
• I assume all risks and hazards incidental to me in volunteering my services,
including transportation to, from and during the activity, and I waive all claims for
injury, death and resulting attorney fees and release the City of Mounds View, its
employees and agents from liability in the event of injury during my volunteer
activities.
• I give the City of Mounds View permission to use my likeness in photograph(s) in
any and all of its publications and in any and all other media (such as videos and
websites) for use in promotion and marketing.
• I release the City of Mounds View from liability in the event of injury during my
volunteer activities.
• I certify that all information provided is accurate and current. I give permission for
the City to verify information if necessary or requested.
• I understand I am applying for a volunteer position and that I will not be paid in
any way. I give my permission to check the references I have listed.
• I understand that a background check must be filled out if I work with youth ages
18 and younger.
• I understand the information on this form may be shared with the City Council
and appropriate City staff.
By checking this box, I also indicate my understanding of the voluntary nature of
my participation and acknowledge that all resulting outcomes will be considered
the property of the City of Mounds View.
Sign: ________________________________________ Date __________________
INFORMED CONSENT
TO: Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
Criminal Justice Information Systems – CHA
1430 Maryland Avenue East
St. Paul, MN 55106
FROM: City of Mounds View
Attention: Personnel Office
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
Applicant Note: The information contained herein is considered private data, and will be used
only to determine your suitability for volunteering with the City of Mounds View. Providing this
information is strictly voluntary and you are not required by law to furnish any of the information
requested herein. However, if you do not furnish it we may have trouble determining your
suitability for volunteering with the City. The information provided herein will be accessible to
you, pertinent staff of the City of Mounds View, or as provided by Minnesota Statutes.
BCA Note: The following person below has applied for a volunteer position with the City of
Mounds View. City policy requires that criminal history inquiries be made on volunteer
applicants.
Full Name: ___________________________________________________________________
(first) (middle) (last)
Maiden, Alias or Former Name: _______________________________________________
Date of Birth: ______________ Sex (M OR F): ____
I authorize the Minnesota of Criminal Apprehension to disclose all criminal history record
information to the City of Mounds View, Attention: Desaree Crane, Assistant City Administrator,
for the purpose of volunteering with this agency.
The expiration of this authorization shall be for a period no longer than one year from the date of
my signature.
________________________________ ________________________
Signature of Applicant Date
State of Minnesota }
County of Ramsey }
Subscribed and sworn to me this day of , 2015.
Notary Public Notary Stamp
Item No: 3
Meeting Date: August 3, 2015
Type of Business: Work Session
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Review Possible Code Amendment Relating to Honey Bees
Introduction:
At the June and July work sessions, the Council discussed the possibility of amending the
City Code to allow backyard beekeeping. Residents and beekeeping experts from the
University of Minnesota and Century College have attended the meetings, encouraging the
Council to amend the Code to remove “honeybees” from the list of prohibited farm animals,
as was done recently for chickens and ducks.
Discussion
A growing number of cities in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, including St. Paul and
Minneapolis, allow backyard beekeeping, often in conjunction with a permit or license.
Other cities have become “bee friendly” as more attention is being paid to the perils
associated with colony collapse disorder and the impacts to pollination as bee populations
decline.
Supporters of backyard beekeeping point out that honey bees are often confused with
more aggressive hornets or wasps. Beekeepers raise bees primarily as a means to enjoy
a fresh and organic supply of honey. Opponents of backyard beekeeping, similar to
opponents of backyard chickens, often suggest that beehives do not belong in a residential
neighborhood, but rather at farms or agriculturally zoned lands. In addition, residents may
have serious allergies such that placement of backyard hives nearby may pose an
unacceptable risk to them.
At the July work session, a resident suggested Council members visit an operating hive to get a
better understanding of the impacts associated with the honeybees and hives. At this writing,
Council member Meehlhause has visited a nearby hive and can respond to his observations.
If the Council were to consider amending the Code to allow backyard beekeeping, a number of
conditions could be incorporated, such as the following:
• No more than two hives per property (unless lot larger than ½ acre)
• Hives shall be set back 10 feet from a property line and from dwellings
• Hives shall be located only in backyards
• Water source shall be provided, best management practices observed
• Beekeepers would be required to obtain a license and demonstrate proof of training
• Permit or license can be revoked/denied by the Council in case of nuisance
The City Council has reviewed a number of other cities’ ordinances concerning honey
bees. Many of the ordinances are quite extensive and may be more than what is needed;
some cities allow honey bees without any permit, license or requirement. Perhaps finding
a middle ground as a starting point would be more appropriate.
Draft Honeybee Amendments
August 3, 2015
Page 2
In addition to reviewing other cities’ ordinances relating to honeybees, the City Council
asked resident Kathy Smith to make recommendations as to possible honeybee
regulations. Her recommendations are attached, and to some extent are consistent
with the draft ordinance provided for review.
Recommendation:
Review the draft ordinance and the recommendations submitted by resident Kathy Smith,
and provide direction to staff as to the next steps.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
City Administrator
Attachments:
1. Kathy Smith Recommendations
2. Draft Honeybee Code Amendment
Suggested Mounds View Honey Bee Ordinance
(Submitted by Kathy Smith)
• Lot size/hive density shall be as follows:
o 0 – ½ ac. = 2 hives
o ½ ac. – 1 ac. = 4 hives
o > 1 ac. = no more than 6 hives
• Hives shall be located in backyard.
• Setbacks to be no less than 5 feet from property lines.
• Hive entrances shall face interior of apiary property.
• A water source shall be provided on site.
• A flyway barrier shall be established if the flyway borders sidewalks or other areas where
pedestrians travel.
• Beekeeper shall register with the city. A one-time registration fee of $50 (?) shall be due upon
approval of license.
• Beekeeper shall provide proof of beekeeping training (i.e, certificate, tuition receipt, etc..). In cases
where the beekeeper received informal training a waiver from an educational institution or a
Certified Master Beekeeper will be substituted for formal training.
• Any documented nuisance apiary will be dealt with on a case-by-case situation.
• License may be revoked by the council in cases where beekeepers fail to address repeated
nuisance bees.
• A beekeeper may receive a temporary variance for an additional hive when they collect a swarm
and until they find a new home for the colony.
Note: This ordinance is subject to change.
ORDINANCE XXX
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 701 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY CODE
TO ADD PROVISIONS FOR THE KEEPING AND RAISING OF HONEY BEES IN
CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
The City of Mounds View ordains:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Title
700, Chapter 701, of the Mounds View Zoning Code by deleting the stricken language
and adding the underlined text as follows:
701.06: RAISING/KEEPING DOMESTIC OR FARM ANIMALS:
Subd. 1. Nuisance Declared: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance
affecting the public peace, safety, and welfare for an owner or resident within the
City to keep or raise any farm animal unless the animal is currently being kept or
raised on the date of the enactment of the ordinance, except as noted below.
b. Residents on properties zoned R-1, Single Family Residential may be permitted to
keep and raise honey bees under the following conditions and restrictions:
(1) Residents seeking approval to keep and raise honey bees shall submit an
application, application fee and site plan. Initial applications shall be
considered by the City Council which shall hold a public hearing on the
matter. Renewals may be approved administratively unless the City has
received substantiated complaints or related violations have been noted
during the previous year.
(2) Applicants for a bee keeping license shall provide proof of applicable training
or provide a waiver indicating how required experience has been obtained.
(3) Hives shall only be located in rear yards and be set back at least ten (10)
feet from property lines and at least twenty-five (25) feet from any public trail
or walkway. No more than two (2) hives shall be permitted on a property
unless lot exceeds one-half acre, in which case no more than four (4) hives
shall be permitted. Hive openings shall face in toward subject property’s
backyard.
(4) A clean water source shall be provided on the subject property.
(5) A beekeeper may receive temporary allowance for an additional hive in the
event a swarm is collected and until a new home is found for the colony. In
no event shall temporary allowance exceed six (6) months.
(6) Equipment shall be maintained in good condition in accordance with
accepted best management practices. Unused beekeeping equipment shall
be properly disposed of or stored indoors.
(7) Permits are valid for one year and shall be renewed annually. Permits may
be revoked or denied by the City Council based on negligence or nuisance.
In such event, the property owner shall be provided with an opportunity to be
heard.
SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 3.07 of the City Charter, City staff shall have the
following summary printed in the official City newspaper in lieu of the complete ordinance:
On _________, 2015, the City Council adopted Ordinance _____ that amends
Chapter 701 of Mounds View Municipal Code to provide for limited and controlled
raising and keeping of Honey Bees on single family residential properties.
Residents would be limited to no more than two hives on lots less than one half
acre, or four hives on lots one-half acre or larger. Hives shall be located in rear
yards only. A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection during
regular business hours at Mounds View City Hall and is available on line at the
City’s web site located at www.ci.mounds-view.mn.us.
SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after its publication in the official City
newspaper.
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING: ___________
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: ___________
PUBLICATION DATE: ______________
_____________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(seal)
Item No: 5
Meeting Date: August 3, 2015
Type of Business: Work Session
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Options Associated with Pursuing Organized
Collection
Introduction:
At the May 4, 2015, Work Session, the City Council expressed support to staff to begin
researching the steps necessary to pursue a system of organized collection in the City of
Mounds View. The detailed process for migrating from an open system to an organized
system is addressed in Minnesota Statutes Section 115A.94, included for your reference at
the end of this report.
Discussion:
The Minnesota Legislature adopted significant changes to the organized collection statute
in 2013 that were designed to simplify the process for adopting organized collection. While
there are essentially five steps for migrating to a system of organized collection, cities that
consider such a system utilize a variety of different tools, procedures and actions to reach
their final decision. Cities may also engage in significant research, opinion surveying, open
houses and listening sessions to help determine whether there is sufficient support to
move to a system of organized collection. In addition, because of the complexities
associated with contract negotiations, terms and conditions, many cities have found it
necessary to engage an attorney or consultant (or both) to assist with the process.
Naturally, there are costs for the additional prep work and outside assistance which,
depending upon the direction of the Council, may need to be factored into the 2016
Budget.
The formal steps for migrating to an organized collection system are as follows:
1. Notice to public and to licensed collectors
2. 60-day negotiation period with licensed collectors
3. Organized collection options committee
4. Public notice and public hearing
5. Implementation.
There are many sub-steps and actions required for each of the above steps (for a more
detailed summary, refer to the attachment following this report). While the above five steps
may seem fairly straightforward, the Council may want to gauge the level of community
support for such an endeavor before formally initiating the process, and it will need to
establish some priorities and talking points which would be referenced during the
negotiation period. If, as a result of the negotiation period, a suitable agreement is not
reached, the City would then create the organized collection options committee (OCOC) so
there should be some thought as to the possible composition of such a group.
Organized Collection Report
August 3, 2015
Page 2
Here is a draft timeline of how the process could move forward, although the Council
should plan to be as flexible as possible as we proceed:
September 7, 2015: Council compiles a list of goals and priorities to support
moving forward with a system of organized collection.
Priorities may include things like sustainability, cost savings,
roadway preservation, safety, reduction of environmental
impacts, etc.
October 5, 2015: Council prepares a list of issues it would like addressed in a
contract for organized collection, such as, who does the
billing, who owns the carts, will there be an opt-out provision,
should yard waste be included, should bulky waste be
included, electronic waste, etc.
November 16, 2015: City Council approves resolution establishing the 60-day
negotiating period.
January 25, 2016: Council considers whether an agreement has been reached
or not, may extend the negotiation period or create by
resolution the organized collection options committee
(OCOC).
Feb – April, 2016: The Committee meets once or twice per month as needed in
council chambers to determine whether a single hauler or
consortium would be better suited for the City. If a single
hauler is preferred, an RFP would be created and
distributed. If a consortium approach is preferred, an
agreement would be created.
May 2, 2016: The Committee presents its report on its research, findings,
and any recommendations to the City Council.
May 23, 2016: City Council holds a public hearing on consortium or single
hauler agreement.
June 13, 2016: City Council approves contract for a term of not less than three
years or not longer than seven years.
April 1, 2017: New organized collection system begins. State law requires an
implementation date of no sooner than six months after council
authorization, however it would seem impractical to roll out
new garbage service in the middle of winter, hence April 1st.
The draft timeline could be much different should the exclusive negotiation period yield a
mutually agreeable contract, in which case a committee would not need to be established.
Best case scenario, new service could begin by summer of 2016.
Organized Collection Report
August 3, 2015
Page 3
Public feedback:
The Council will need to advise staff on the extent and manner to which public feedback
will be sought. Naturally each of the meetings identified above will serve as an opportunity
for residents to provide input and feedback, but more proactive steps can be taken. A few
possible ways to solicit input and feedback are listed as follows:
• Ask residents to fill out an online survey (e.g., Survey Monkey)
• Ask residents to mail in a feedback form
• Contract with a firm to conduct a statistically valid phone survey
• Hold an informal listening session or open house
• Schedule a public hearing before setting the 60-day period
• Send flyer in the utility bills, ask for feedback
• Ask residents to voluntarily report their garbage rates
• Ask residents how much service they would like
• Create a PSA that runs on the cable channel
• Create an email list for “project” updates and feedback
• Newsletter articles.
Budget Impacts:
The amount of staff time that would be needed to coordinate such a project as Organized
Collection would be measured in hundreds of hours, if not thousands. While staff time
alone will not generally add costs to the budget, devoting such a large block of time over
the course of a year will invariably result in other projects being delayed or not being done
at all. If the City Council would like to engage in proactive surveying of residents to assess
opinions regarding organized collection, this could cost a few thousand dollars. Where the
budget would be impacted most is if consultants are used to assist with the process. It is
not uncommon to have the City Attorney present at all negotiation sessions and he might
be involved in the preparation of the RFP and certainly in the drafting of the contract.
Other cities have engaged in specialized consultants with an expertise in organized
collection activities. Given the complexities of such a process, it would be prudent to
budget as much as $15,000 for legal services and consultant work.
Recommendation:
Review the information presented herein and provide feedback to staff regarding the
proposed timeline, the extent to which proactive public feedback would be solicited and
how, and then discuss the potential costs (staff time and budgetary) associated with
undertaking the organized collection activity.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
City Administrator
Steps to Migrate to an Organized Collection Solid Waste System
1. Notice to public and to licensed collectors
A city must first give notice to the public and to any licensed collectors that it is considering adopting
organized collection. State law does not specify how notice should be provided. The League of MN Cities
recommends providing both published notice and individual mailed notice to each licensed collector.
2. 60-day negotiation period with licensed collectors
After the city provides notice of its intent to consider adopting organized collection, it must provide a 60-
day negotiation period that is exclusive between the city and any collectors licensed to operate in the city.
A city is not required to reach an agreement with the licensed collectors during this period. The purpose of
the negotiation period is to allow the licensed collectors to develop a proposal in which they, as members of
an organization of collectors, will collect solid waste from designated sections of the city.
The proposal must contain identified city priorities, including issues related to zone creation, traffic, safety,
environmental performance, service provided, and price, and must reflect existing collectors maintaining
their respective market share of business as determined by each hauler’s average customer count during the
six months before the beginning of the 60-day negotiation period. If an existing collector opts to be
excluded from the proposal, the city may allocate its customers proportionally based on market share to the
participating collectors who choose to negotiate.
If an organized collection agreement is established as a result of the 60-day negotiation period, it must be in
effect for a period of three to seven years. Upon execution of an agreement between the participating
licensed collectors and the city, the city shall establish organized collection through appropriate local
controls. The city does not need to establish an organized collections options committee if it reaches an
agreement with the licensed haulers during the 60-day negotiation period; however, the city must first
provide public notice and a public hearing before officially deciding to implement organized collection.
Organized collection may begin no sooner than six months after the effective date of the city’s decision to
implement organized collection.
3. Organized collection options committee
If a city does not reach an agreement with its licensed collectors during the 60-day negotiation period, it
can form by resolution an “organized collection options committee” to study various methods of
organized collection and to issue a report. The city council appoints the committee members. The
committee is subject to the open meeting law and has several mandatory duties.
First, the committee shall determine which methods of organized collection to examine, which must
include: a system in which a single collector collects solid waste from all sections of the city; and a system
in which multiple collectors, either singly or as members of an organization of collectors, collect solid
waste from different sections of the city.
Second, the committee shall establish a list of criteria on which the organized collection methods selected
for examination will be evaluated, which may include: costs to residential subscribers, miles driven by
collection vehicles on city streets and alleys, initial and operating costs of implementing the organized
collection system, providing incentives for waste reduction, impacts on solid waste collectors, and other
physical, economic, fiscal, social, environmental, and aesthetic impacts.
Third, the committee shall collect information regarding the operation and efficacy of existing methods of
organized collection in other cities and towns.
Fourth, the committee shall seek input from, at a minimum:
• the city council
• the city official responsible for solid waste issues
• persons currently licensed to operate solid waste collection and recycling services in the city
• city residents who currently pay for residential solid waste collection services.
Finally, the committee must issue a report on its research, findings, and any recommendations to the city
council.
4. Public notice and public hearing
A city council shall consider the report and recommendations of the organized collection options
committee. A city must provide public notice and hold at least one public hearing before deciding to
implement organized collection.
5. Implementation
A city can begin organized collection no sooner than six months after the effective date of the city’s
decision to implement organized collection. A city may organize collection as a municipal service where
city employees collect solid waste from a defined geographic service area or areas. In the alternative,
cities may organize collection by using one or more private solid waste collectors or an organization of
collectors. An agreement with private collectors may be made through an ordinance, franchise, license,
negotiated or bidded contract, or by other means.
MINNESOTA STATUTES
115A.94 ORGANIZED COLLECTION.
Subdivision 1.Definition.
"Organized collection" means a system for collecting solid waste in which a specified
collector, or a member of an organization of collectors, is authorized to collect from a defined
geographic service area or areas some or all of the solid waste that is released by generators for
collection.
Subd. 2. Local authority.
A city or town may organize collection, after public notification and hearing as required in
subdivisions 4a to 4d. A county may organize collection as provided in subdivision 5. A city or
town that has organized collection as of May 1, 2013, is exempt from subdivisions 4a to 4d.
Subd. 3. General provisions.
(a) The local government unit may organize collection as a municipal service or by
ordinance, franchise, license, negotiated or bidded contract, or other means, using one or more
collectors or an organization of collectors.
(b) The local government unit may not establish or administer organized collection in a
manner that impairs the preservation and development of recycling and markets for recyclable
materials. The local government unit shall exempt recyclable materials from organized collection
upon a showing by the generator or collector that the materials are or will be separated from
mixed municipal solid waste by the generator, separately collected, and delivered for reuse in
their original form or for use in a manufacturing process.
(c) The local government unit shall invite and employ the assistance of interested persons,
including persons licensed to operate solid waste collection services in the local government unit,
in developing plans and proposals for organized collection and in establishing the organized
collection system.
(d) Organized collection accomplished by contract or as a municipal service may include a
requirement that all or any portion of the solid waste, except (1) recyclable materials and (2)
materials that are processed at a resource recovery facility at the capacity in operation at the time
that the requirement is imposed, be delivered to a waste facility identified by the local
government unit. In a district or county where a resource recovery facility has been designated by
ordinance under section 115A.86, organized collection must conform to the requirements of the
designation ordinance.
Subd. 4.
[Repealed, 2013 c 45 s 7]
Subd. 4a. Committee establishment.
(a) Before implementing an ordinance, franchise, license, contract, or other means of
organizing collection, a city or town, by resolution of the governing body, must establish an
organized collection options committee to identify, examine, and evaluate various methods of
organized collection. The governing body shall appoint the committee members.
(b) The organized collection options committee is subject to chapter 13D.
Subd. 4b. Committee duties.
The committee established under subdivision 4a shall:
(1) determine which methods of organized collection to examine, which must include:
(i) a system in which a single collector collects solid waste from all sections of a city or
town; and
(ii) a system in which multiple collectors, either singly or as members of an organization of
collectors, collect solid waste from different sections of a city or town;
(2) establish a list of criteria on which the organized collection methods selected for
examination will be evaluated, which may include: costs to residential subscribers, miles driven
by collection vehicles on city streets and alleys, initial and operating costs to the city of
implementing the organized collection system, providing incentives for waste reduction, impacts
on solid waste collectors, and other physical, economic, fiscal, social, environmental, and
aesthetic impacts;
(3) collect information regarding the operation and efficacy of existing methods of
organized collection in other cities and towns;
(4) seek input from, at a minimum:
(i) the governing body of the city or town;
(ii) the local official of the city or town responsible for solid waste issues;
(iii) persons currently licensed to operate solid waste collection and recycling services in the
city or town; and
(iv) residents of the city or town who currently pay for residential solid waste collection
services; and
(5) issue a report on the committee's research, findings, and any recommendations to the
governing body of the city or town.
Subd. 4c. Governing body; implementation.
The governing body of the city or town shall consider the report and recommendations of
the organized collection options committee. The governing body must provide public notice and
hold at least one public hearing before deciding whether to implement organized collection.
Organized collection may begin no sooner than six months after the effective date of the decision
of the governing body of the city or town to implement organized collection.
Subd. 4d. Participating collectors proposal requirement.
Prior to establishing a committee under subdivision 4a to consider organizing residential
solid waste collection, a city or town with more than one licensed collector must notify the public
and all licensed collectors in the community. The city or town must provide a 60-day period in
which meetings and negotiations shall occur exclusively between licensed collectors and the city
or town to develop a proposal in which interested licensed collectors, as members of an
organization of collectors, collect solid waste from designated sections of the city or town. The
proposal shall include identified city or town priorities, including issues related to zone creation,
traffic, safety, environmental performance, service provided, and price, and shall reflect existing
haulers maintaining their respective market share of business as determined by each hauler's
average customer count during the six months prior to the commencement of the 60-day
negotiation period. If an existing hauler opts to be excluded from the proposal, the city may
allocate their customers proportionally based on market share to the participating collectors who
choose to negotiate. The initial organized collection agreement executed under this subdivision
must be for a period of three to seven years. Upon execution of an agreement between the
participating licensed collectors and city or town, the city or town shall establish organized
collection through appropriate local controls and is not required to fulfill the requirements of
subdivisions 4a, 4b, and 4c, except that the governing body must provide the public notification
and hearing required under subdivision 4c.
Subd. 5. County organized collection.
(a) A county may by ordinance require cities and towns within the county to organize
collection. Organized collection ordinances of counties may:
(1) require cities and towns to require the separation and separate collection of recyclable
materials;
(2) specify the material to be separated; and
(3) require cities and towns to meet any performance standards for source separation that are
contained in the county solid waste plan.
(b) A county may itself organize collection under subdivisions 4a to 4d in any city or town
that does not comply with a county organized collection ordinance adopted under this
subdivision, and the county may implement, as part of its organized collection, the source
separation program and performance standards required by its organized collection ordinance.
Subd. 6. Organized collection not required or prevented.
(a) The authority granted in this section to organize solid waste collection is optional and is
in addition to authority to govern solid waste collection granted by other law.
(b) Except as provided in subdivision 5, a city, town, or county is not:
(1) required to organize collection; or
(2) prevented from organizing collection of solid waste or recyclable material.
(c) Except as provided in subdivision 5, a city, town, or county may exercise any authority
granted by any other law, including a home rule charter, to govern collection of solid waste.
Subd. 7. Anticompetitive conduct.
(a) A political subdivision that organizes collection under this section is authorized to
engage in anticompetitive conduct to the extent necessary to plan and implement its chosen
organized collection system and is immune from liability under state laws relating to antitrust,
restraint of trade, unfair trade practices, and other regulation of trade or commerce.
(b) An organization of solid waste collectors, an individual collector, and their officers,
members, employees, and agents who cooperate with a political subdivision that organizes
collection under this section are authorized to engage in anticompetitive conduct to the extent
necessary to plan and implement the organized collection system, provided that the political
subdivision actively supervises the participation of each entity. An organization, entity, or person
covered by this paragraph is immune from liability under state law relating to antitrust, restraint
of trade, unfair trade practices, and other regulation of trade or commerce.
Community Engagement Report
City of Bloomington, Minnesota
Solid Waste Management Plan
Prepared for:
City of Bloomington
Prepared by:
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
iii
X:\MS\IE\2013\13B015-00\10000 Reports\Final CER as of 3-3-14\R-Community Engagement Report 3-3-14.docx
Community Engagement Report
Solid Waste Management Plan
Table of Contents
Page
Synopsis ...........................................................................................................................................v
1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................1
2 City Council .............................................................................................................................2
3 National Citizen Survey ..........................................................................................................3
4 Meetings with Community Organizations ...............................................................................5
4.1 Trash Haulers .................................................................................................................5
4.2 Master Recyclers and Composters .................................................................................8
4.3 Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission .....................................................................10
4.4 Business Organizations ................................................................................................11
5 Bloomington Community Outreach Tools ............................................................................11
5.1 City Webpage Dedicated to the Plan ...........................................................................11
5.2 Emails and Social Media .............................................................................................12
5.3 City “Briefing” Newsletter ..........................................................................................13
6 Surveys ..................................................................................................................................13
7 Open Houses ..........................................................................................................................13
7.1 The First Open House on December 4 .........................................................................13
7.2 The Second Open House on January 16 ......................................................................14
8 Summary of Findings ............................................................................................................17
8.1 Goals and Strategies .....................................................................................................17
8.2 Environmental Protection ............................................................................................18
8.3 Organized Collection ...................................................................................................18
8.4 Educational Opportunities ...........................................................................................18
8.5 Waste Reduction, Recycling and Organics ..................................................................19
8.6 Enforcement of Ordinances .........................................................................................19
8.7 Citywide Curbside Cleanup .........................................................................................19
8.8 City Staffing Resources ...............................................................................................19
iv
Tables
Table 3-1 Bloomington’s National Citizen Survey (2013): Response to Custom
Question #2 on Recycling and Organized Garbage Collection ..............................5
Table 7-1 Draft Goals: Open House Participant Rankings ..................................................16
Table 7-2 Draft Improvement Strategies: Open House Participant Rankings ......................17
Figures
Figure 2-1 Residential Solid Waste Hauling Districts in Bloomington ..................................2
Figure 3-1 Frequency of Recycling in the Last 12 Months .....................................................4
Figure 5-1 Bloomington Web Page Dedicated Updates About to the Solid Waste
Management Plan................................................................................................12
Figure 7-2 Draft Outline of Strategies: Example Large Sheet of Open House Results ........16
Figure 7-1 Draft Goals: Example Large Sheet of Open House Results ................................15
Appendices
Appendix A: Recycling and Solid Waste Management Surveys:
A1 Residential Survey Form
A2 Business Survey Form
Appendix B: Survey Results:
B1 Responses to Multiple Choice Questions
B2 Text Responses to Open Ended Questions
v
Solid Waste Management Plan:
Community Engagement Report
Synopsis
A Solid Waste Management Plan (Plan) is being developed to guide the City's approach to solid
waste. The Plan will cover components of solid waste management, including recycling, waste
reduction, yard waste collection, food waste/organics recovery, mixed solid waste
collection/recovery and land disposal. The Plan is intended to give the City a clear vision of
potential solid waste and recycling policies to meet the City's goals. Community engagement is a
key component in developing a sustainable solid waste program. As such, the City has been
seeking active involvement and input from the community throughout this project. The
Community Engagement Report documents the details of the outreach methods used in the
engagement process and the results that have been obtained so far. The report is a “living”
document that will continue to be updated throughout
the engagement process. A copy of the report can be
found on the City’s website. All public comments
received through January 31, 2014 are also
catalogued and addressed by the report. A synopsis
of the results of the community engagement process
is provided below.
Throughout the process, the City of Bloomington has been, and will continue to, solicit input and
feedback from concerned parties and interest groups. Along with residents, business
organizations, the Master Recyclers and Composters (MRC), the Bloomington Sustainable
Coalition, the Park, Arts and Recreation Commission (PARC), and waste haulers have been
engaged. A wide variety of outreach tools are being used to help ensure every resident has an
opportunity to provide input. The City Council will adopt the resident-formed Plan only after
adequate opportunity has been provided for public input, including:
♦ City Council meetings
♦ Open Houses
♦ Surveys
♦ Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission (PARC)
meetings
♦ Meetings with interested groups and organizations
♦ Other community meetings
♦ Solid Waste Management Plan web page
♦ Phone calls, emails, and other electronic/social media
The Community Engagement Report
supporting the Solid Waste
Management Plan can be downloaded
from the City’s web page at:
http://BloomingtonMN.gov/main_top/
3_homecomm/trash/waste.htm?r=us.
Additional comments will
continue to be received until
the public hearing on the draft
Solid Waste Management
Plan. A public hearing has
been tentatively scheduled for
April21, 2014 to present the
Plan.
vi
The City values its residents’ input.
Bloomington staff will continue to
collect resident’s guidance and
concerns.
Goals and Strategies
Resident feedback has been requested on the City’s solid waste management goals and strategies
throughout the project. Input received at the second Open House held on January 16, 2014
confirmed the comments provided through other engagement activities. The feedback received
emphasized that the most important goals include: reducing road wear impacts; lowering
environmental impacts; and improving recycling, composting and waste reduction. Residents
also believe that enhancing public education and awareness and assuring that all residents have
adequate recycling services are important goals. The Goals and Strategies are individual
chapters in the Plan.
Environmental Protection
The community also strongly believes in environmental protection. Highly-engaged and
committed volunteers like the resident group Master Recyclers and Composters, the
Bloomington Sustainable Coalition, and the Parks, Art and Recreation Commission confirmed
community support for sustainability issues such as improved solid waste management.
Environmental protection was a common theme reflected in many of the community
conversations, responses to surveys and in the comments on the draft goals and the draft outline
of strategies.
Organized Collection
The City of Bloomington has used a national survey tool that allows the City to evaluate how
well they are serving the residents of the community and identify issues that are important to
them. The National Citizen SurveyTM of Bloomington residents clearly indicated a majority of
survey participants are satisfied with the solid waste, recycling and yard services available within
the City. A customized question in the 2013 National Citizen SurveyTM for Bloomington
indicated that 63% felt that the potential action to “Organize garbage collection so that only one
hauler serves each neighborhood” was somewhat important, very important, or essential to the
respondents. The remaining 37% said that organized collection was not at all important.
Participants in the community engagement process have been overwhelmingly supportive of
organized solid waste collection as a critical aspect of Bloomington’s future solid waste
management efforts. The respondents involved in the community engagement process expressed
a desire for fewer trucks in their neighborhoods, less noise, fewer road impacts, more safety on
neighborhood streets and cul-de-sacs., as well as more organized and coordinated waste
education and service delivery.
A one-on-one meeting with the City’s licensed trash haulers and their comments at the first Open
House provided another perspective on the organized collection issue. Discussions with City
Council at study sessions have indicated an interest in exploring how any change to organized
collection could be fair and equitable to haulers.
For more information or to submit comments about the
Solid Waste Management Plan, contact:
Jim Gates, Deputy Director of Public Works
952-563-8730
SolidWasteManagementPlan@BloomingtonMN.gov
vii
Educational Opportunities
In meetings and in surveys, participants expressed the belief that increased education efforts are
needed to achieve the proposed goals and draft strategies for improved solid waste management.
The Master Recyclers and Composters, a volunteer group that advocates recycling and
composting, have provided significant community education. Education gaps that need to be
addressed include: better knowledge of what materials are and are not recyclable, outreach to
residents of multi-unit housing to encourage them to recycle, waste reduction strategies for all
residents, and “away-from-home” recycling opportunities (e.g. recycling at parks). Community
members expressed the desire that additional City resources should be dedicated to solid waste
related education activities.
Waste Reduction, Recycling and Organics
Nearly all community engagement participants expressed support for specific waste reduction,
recycling and organics collection and composting actions. Citizens repeatedly confirmed these
three activities should be strongly represented in the Solid Waste Management Plan.
Revisions of Ordinances
The City has ordinances that: require recycling by businesses and residents; require trash haulers
to provide specific services; and outline City responsibilities. Many participants stated the City
needs to improve enforcement of its existing ordinances. They also indicated that more City
staff resources should be allocated for trash and recycling education and enforcement activities.
Citywide Curbside Cleanup
The citywide Curbside Cleanup is a highly valued service. Almost without exception, residents
and businesses expressed support for the Curbside Cleanup program. However, there is
widespread recognition that the program is expensive and there may be more cost-effective ways
to operate it.
City Staffing Resources
The City of Bloomington had a staff person with a portion of time dedicated to recycling and
solid waste issues until 2009. The recycling coordinator was tasked with providing: education
about recycling and waste reduction and preparation of County-required reports. Many
participants stated they missed the services provided by City staff. Some participants simply
recommended the City should staff this recycling coordinator position again.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 1
March 2014
1 Introduction
Bloomington residents, businesses and other organizations have been active in sustainability,
recycling, composting and other solid waste issues and expect opportunities to continue to
partner with the City in each aspect of the solid waste planning and implementation. There are
many individuals, organizations and private companies that are keenly interested in the
development of the Solid Waste Management Plan (“Plan”).
The City of Bloomington is committed to quality local decision making and community building,
and therefore practices community engagement. Community engagement asks for the active
involvement of residents and businesses at the earliest stages in a project, rather than merely
participating in a public hearing just before a final decision is made. Engagement asks residents,
in a variety of forms and venues, for advice and input on a topic the City is studying, before the
problem solving is complete.
Research has shown that effective resident engagement can foster a sense of community,
engender trust, enhance creative problem solving, build consensus and increase support for
community projects. This is especially important for municipal decisions that will affect the
entire community and which will have long-standing effects. Residents often have information
that officials want in order to design a sound program.
The City of Bloomington is soliciting input and feedback from all concerned parties and interest
groups through a wide variety of outreach tools. The City Council is scheduled to consider
adoption of this Plan only after hearing from the Bloomington public and providing ample
opportunities for comment and input.
The City has assigned the development of the Plan to a Bloomington Project Management
(Team PMT) including staff from the Department of Public Works (PW) and Community
Development/Environmental Health. Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC (Consultant) was
hired to assist in the community engagement process and to draft the Plan.
As part of the PMT, the Consultant is charged with first listening and gathering information from
affected parties, including City Council and City staff, and then drafting the Plan document for
public review and comment.
This Community Engagement Report (Report) documents the recent methods and results used by
the City to engage interested parties. All public comments received to-date through January 31,
2014 are catalogued and addressed by this Report.
Additional comments will continue to be received up through the public hearing on the draft
Plan. The public hearing is tentatively scheduled for April 21, 2014 pending City Council
authorization.
2 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
The following community engagement tools were used to provide convenient opportunities for
comment:
♦ City Council meetings
♦ Open Houses
♦ Surveys
♦ Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission (PARC) meetings
♦ Other community meetings
♦ Solid Waste Management Plan web page
♦ Phone calls, emails, and other electronic/social media
2 City Council
The Bloomington City Council has been discussing solid waste management for a number of
years. A chapter in the Plan is dedicated to a more complete summary of the history of these
City Council deliberations and decisions over the years leading up to the present-date system of
services and programs.
In 1989 the City Council determined that trash collection for Bloomington residents should be
improved to divide the City into five (5) residential hauling districts. Each district has solid
waste collection only on a specified day as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 2-1
Residential Solid Waste Hauling Districts in Bloomington
In 1995 the Council considered further improvements, to more fully organize trash and recycling
collection. There were several contentious public hearings, and the Council decided not to
pursue the matter at that time. Individual neighborhoods and homeowner organizations,
however, pursued limited organization of trash collection services on their own, believing they
had the support of the City.
In 2010, the issue of organized trash collection was revisited. The Council decided to delay
action until the Hennepin County Master Plan was completed. After completion of the County
Plan, in 2012, a group of residents asked the Council to again consider implementation of a
system of organized solid waste collection.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 3
March 2014
The City Council held a discussion about solid waste management at its Study Session meeting
on September 24, 2012. City staff presented a summary of background information about
organized collection including: recent results from other studies completed for the State of
Minnesota; and the recent experience of Maplewood, Minnesota in changing to organized trash
collection.
The City Council set the tone for the development of the Solid Waste Management Plan at their
meeting on May 20, 2013. In their discussions, they commented on the feedback they had
received from residents and businesses on this issue. Topics discussed at this City Council
meeting included:
♦ The increasing amount of blowing litter from garbage trucks in the City
♦ The effect of heavy garbage trucks on pavement
♦ The potential to reduce pollution and otherwise help the environment
♦ Opportunities for residents to save money under organized collection systems
At the May 20, 2013 Council Meeting, the Council received additional background information
from City staff about the amendment to Minnesota Statutes relating to organized collection (M.S.
115A.94). The City Council decided to contract with an expert consultant for assistance with
development of a comprehensive solid waste plan, to be followed in the summer of 2014 with
Council discussion of a preferred approach to solid waste management. The Council,
understanding the high potential for controversy, directed that there should be extensive
community engagement in the development of the Solid Waste Management Plan.
City Council meetings since then on this Plan have included:
♦ September 9, 2013 to accept the proposal from Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
and award the contract to Foth for consulting services.
♦ November 4, 2013 to receive an introduction to the process, schedule and content outline
of the City’s first comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan.
♦ December 19, 2013 orientation for new City Council members about the process and
schedule for the new Plan.
There have been several City Manager Informational packets sent to City Council to keep them
updated on the progress of the Plan.
3 National Citizen Survey
The City of Bloomington participates in the National Citizen SurveyTM 1, coordinated by the
International City Managers Association and partially funded by the State of Minnesota.
Through the National Citizen SurveyTM, Bloomington annually surveys its citizens about their
satisfaction with City services. Resident opinions about trash and recycling services are included
in the survey as part of the Survey’s measures of environmental sustainability in a community.
4 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
Highlights from the most recent 2013 National Citizen SurveyTM include:
♦ The majority of Bloomington citizens believe their residential garbage (89%), recycling
(88%) and yard waste collection services (85%) are good to excellent. For comparison,
96% of residents believe that fire services are good to excellent, 89% believe that their
drinking water is good to excellent and 76% believe that street cleaning is good to
excellent.
♦ Bloomington residents rate these services higher on average compared to other cities as
benchmarked by the National Citizen SurveyTM. The Survey allows Bloomington to
compare itself to cities nationally and to cities that Bloomington selects as being similar
cities. Yard waste collection, recycling collection and garbage collection was “much
above” the national cities. Yard waste and recycling collections were rated “much above”
the similar cities and garbage collection was “above” the similar cities.
♦ Bloomington residents report that they participate in recycling at a much higher
frequency than the national cities and the similar cities. 95% of Bloomington residents
reported that they had recycled used paper, cans or bottles from their homes at least once
in 2013, consistent with 93% in 2012.
♦ As shown in Figure 3-1 below, participation in recycling is one of the more frequent
resident activities reported by Bloomington residents. 69% of the residents reported that
they had recycled more than 26 times in 2013; the next highest activity reported was
participating in religious or spiritual activities at 18% and visiting a neighborhood or City
park at 16%.
Figure 3-1
Frequency of Recycling in the Last 12 Months
Source: Bloomington’s National Citizen SurveyTM, 2012
♦ The City added a “custom” question to the National Citizen SurveyTM related to the
City’s strategic plan focused on sustainable practices. Two (2) of the 14 sustainable
practices were on solid waste management: recycling and organized collection. Table 3-
1 below shows the results excerpts relating to these two solid waste practices.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 5
March 2014
About 95% of the respondents stated that it is “Essential”, “Very important” or
“Somewhat important” to increase recycling. Only about 5% said that increasing
recycling is “Not at all important”.
67% stated that it was “Essential”, “Very Important”, or “Somewhat important to
“organize garbage collection so that only one hauler serves each neighborhood”
“Increase recycling” was the most important action considering the subtotal number of
respondents (70%) that stated it is “Essential” (29%) plus “Very important” (41%). The next
most important action was to replace lights and equipment to reduce energy consumption in City
buildings at 64%. “Organize garbage collection” was tied for tenth place among the fourteen
(14) optional practices using the same subtotal (37%) method of adding respondents that stated it
was “Essential (16%) plus “Very important” (21%).
This National Citizen SurveyTM can be used as another means of gauging public opinions of
Bloomington’s residents on these relative to other service issues.
Table 3-1
Bloomington’s National Citizen Survey (2013):
Response to Custom Question #2 on Recycling and Organized Garbage
Collection
Custom Question 2
The City has a strategic plan focused on
implementing sustainable practices.
Please indicate how important, if at all, it
is for the City to carry out each of the
following potential actions
Essential Very
Important
Somewhat
Important
Not At All
Important Total
♦ Increase recycling 29% 41% 26% 5% 100%
♦ Organize garbage collection so
that only one hauler serves each
neighborhood
16% 21% 26% 37% 100%
Source: Bloomington’s National Citizen SurveyTM, 2013
4 Meetings with Community Organizations
4.1 Trash Haulers
All licensed haulers were invited to a meeting with the Consultant held November 12, 2013 to
discuss various solid waste management issues in Bloomington.
The haulers were asked what things are going well with trash services in Bloomington. Their
responses included:
♦ The haulers like the ability to haul commercial and/or residential wastes, and the zoned
days for residential trash and recycling collection.
6 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
♦ Residents have freedom of choice and receive great service because of competition.
Homeowners’ associations (or neighborhood blocks) can select a hauler, or stay open to
choice by each household.
♦ The City should maintain the freedom of choice, but if the City does change the trash
collection system, it should keep the present haulers that are in the system.
♦ Several (3) cart sizes are available and everyone can have a cart.
When asked what things are not going well with the trash system, the haulers noted that:
♦ They have difficulty in collecting bad debt and managing changing bill responsibility
when residents change haulers or use different names to avoid paying the trash bill.
♦ Residents lack an understanding of holidays (e.g., major vs. minor holidays for the trash
collection calendar) and the City’s trash zones. Better information from the City to
residents is needed.
♦ Residents do not understand the real cost of services, possibly because there are so many
different rates for the same service in the City.
♦ It is difficult for haulers to enforce various City ordinances (e.g., requirements to recycle,
service areas, etc.)
The haulers were asked what is going well with recycling in Bloomington, and they responded
that:
♦ Single-stream recycling has been very successful and Bloomington residents have higher
participation in recycling because:
Residents are well educated.
Bloomington’s older population has a strong recycling ethic.
Most residents take the time to recycle and ask about what can / can’t be recycled.
♦ Contamination in the recycling carts is relatively low.
♦ Some haulers provide several sizes of recycling carts.
When the haulers were asked how recycling could be improved, they responded that:
♦ Residents don’t understand the cost of recycling; there is a perception that recycling is a
gold mine.
♦ Residents don’t always know their recycling day.
♦ Formerly, haulers were asked to provide a list of residential customers who are “non-
recyclers”. Haulers believe “telling” on customers goes against their desires to provide
very good customer service.
♦ Haulers are asked to report the percentage of customers that “participate” in recycling for
Bloomington’s ReTRAC reports to Hennepin County, but they do not have a common
understanding of the City’s definition of “participation rates”. The City or County should
define the methods and terms for these numbers.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 7
March 2014
The haulers were asked to discuss their perceptions of yard waste service in Bloomington, and if
they believe residents are ready to have separate food waste/organics collection citywide. They
had several comments, including:
♦ There is good momentum right now for adding food waste/organics collection services.
The City should be sure to intensively examine all options (including dealing with
emerald ash borer quarantine regulations on tree or brush waste).
♦ Effective food waste/organics collection can reduce solid waste tonnage, but for
efficiency, the City should look at collection of food waste/organics mixed with yard
waste. Randy’s stated they offer “co-collection” of organics within the trash cart as part
of Randy’s new “Blue BagTM” program.2
♦ Collection and composting of organics is not free, and the emerald ash borer (EAB)
quarantine restrictions are a significant added cost.
♦ There are no composting facilities in Bloomington to deliver yard wastes and/or food
waste/organics. The transfer stations for yard wastes and/or food waste/organics are in
Minneapolis or Brooklyn Park, requiring extra cost for travel. The County and/or City
should consider developing transfer capacity in Bloomington.
♦ Up to 95% of Bloomington residents subscribe to yard waste collection service which is a
much higher subscription rate than other cities.
♦ Some residents do not use the compostable bags required by State law. Haulers believe
some stores that sell plastic bags give residents the impression they do not need to
purchase the more expensive, certified “compostable” bags (e.g., paper yard waste bags)
and that non-certified, “biodegradable” plastic bags or traditional plastic bags are
acceptable.
♦ Citizens want a brush drop-off site in Bloomington for brush, limbs and stumps.
Bulky wastes are large items such as chairs, sofas, mattresses and bed springs, appliances and
white goods, lawn mowers and snow blowers. Bloomington provides the annual Citywide
Curbside Cleanup service in part to help its residents manage bulky wastes. Only one of the
haulers contracts with the City for this program, but all the haulers are familiar with bulky waste
management alternatives used in other cities.
When the haulers were asked to comment on bulky wastes issues, they noted that:
♦ It is very important to find a way to continue bulky waste service in Bloomington. The
City could continue its once a year program or could require each hauler to provide bulky
waste collection service on a regular basis, year-round.
♦ Some residents have a lot of bulky wastes. Some have very little. There are also
demographic differences between the “east side” versus the “west side” of the City that
affect the type of bulky wastes disposed.
The challenge of the cost of the annual Curbside Cleanup program and lack of multiple bidders
was discussed. Haulers noted that:
♦ Weekend collections are limited by Minnesota Department of Transportation rules that
set a maximum number of hours any one driver can work each week.
8 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
♦ The older “rear-load packers” are best suited for handling bulky wastes and other waste
from the Citywide Curbside Cleanup program. The number of rear-load packers in
service is decreasing because of the industry-wide trend to side-loading, automated
trucks. The style of trucks (e.g., automated side loaders versus rear loaders) is a real
issue because haulers now have fewer rear load trucks.
♦ A large number of trucks (estimated at 30 to 35 trucks, plus appliances recycling
subcontractors) are needed on any given Saturday to service the number of stops and
waste collected during the City’s Curbside Cleanup program. This requires a very large
fleet, preventing smaller haulers from bidding. The City could consider dividing up the
districts or finding other means to encourage smaller haulers to bid such asforming a
consortium.
4.2 Master Recyclers and Composters
The Master Recyclers and Composters (MRC) group was invited to meet with the Consultant
and City staff November 12, 2013 to discuss trash, recycling and composting issues. The MRC
group is very active in the community providing education and expertise in recycling,
composting and sustainability. They also approached the Council to request that organized
recyclables collection be implemented in a letter submitted in August 2012.
The group was asked what is going well with recycling. They responded:
♦ All haulers offer curbside recycling service. The single-stream method, with carts with
every-other-week collection, is now universal in Bloomington.
♦ Weekly recyclables collection (instead of every-other-week) is helpful to encourage
participation. But not all haulers offer weekly collection.
♦ MRC members have observed a high rate of recycling by residents. They believe the
City is doing a good job providing information this year, praising the City “Briefing”
newsletter, including the “Earth Action Heroes” feature.
♦ The MRC presence at the Bloomington Farmer’s Market helps reach out and provide
education. MRC passes out education materials. This includes a magnet with the
standard recyclables collected similar to the City’s “Recycling Guide” and Hennepin
County brochures about batteries, light bulbs, and prescription drugs.
♦ MRC considers the Citywide Curbside Cleanup to be a positive event.
To improve recycling, MRC members stated that:
♦ Residents should have bigger recycling bins and smaller trash bins.
♦ Not enough people use the County’s household hazardous waste and problem materials
drop-off facility in Bloomington. More education is needed from the City and County to
promote its use. Hennepin County should loosen the rules so that small contractors can
use the County’s facility.
♦ Recycling and disposal of different types of light bulbs are an issue, including
incandescent, fluorescent, and light-emitting diode (LED) lights.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 9
March 2014
♦ Multi-unit properties need improved recycling services and more education. There is a
significant lack of convenience for recycling in high-rises. Compare the convenience of
the trash chute next to the elevators to the inconvenience of carrying recyclables down to
the ground floor. Townhouse recycling is also difficult with some occupants taking
recyclables to the complex entrance instead of their driveway.
Yard waste collection was discussed by the MRC group. The MRC group had the following
suggestions:
♦ The end of November would be better end date for collection as leaves may still be on
trees past October.
♦ Haulers do a good job of collecting yard waste and enforcing the State ban on traditional
plastic bags by not picking up the bags. Bloomington also does a good job of
enforcement follow-up. The City sends educational brochures with enforcement orders.
The biggest problem to ending the use of plastic bags is retailers still sell black plastic
“biodegradable” bags not meeting the standards for certified “compostable” bags.
The MRC group represents some of the City’s most knowledgeable residents about food waste
composting and organics collection issues. They were asked for their input about residential
food waste/organics collection. They noted that:
♦ Food waste/organics collection should be city-wide. All residents should automatically
get a food waste/organics cart. Food waste/organics collection service should be “opt
out” and perhaps mandatory. Food waste/organics should not be an “opt-in” or voluntary
system where residents must proactively subscribe and pay more to get a food
waste/organics cart and collection service.
♦ Haulers should be required to provide food waste/organics collection as part of their
service.
♦ The current large trash carts should be repurposed into food waste/organics containers
and residents should be given new, smaller trash containers.
♦ One hauler is getting new customers in Bloomington with their Blue BagTM organics
collection. They charge $50 for the first year of food waste/organics service and provide
a year’s supply of compostable Blue Bags. The same hauler charges $100 the next year
and still provides an annual supply of Blue Bags.
♦ It is hard for new users to figure out where to make space for a separate food
waste/organics container such as a kitchen bucket. Also, the instructions are new about
what to put in each of three carts (recycling, food waste/organics and trash). Education
and encouragement are essential to developing a successful food waste/organics recovery
program.
♦ The price for food waste/organics collection is too high within the current open hauling
system. If food waste/organics were added, each hauler may have a different option
which is just not cost-effective.
10 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
In January 2014, the MRC group distributed a draft position paper in response to the City’s call
for comments on the draft goals and strategies for the Plan. The position paper recommends the
City establish goals to:
♦ Increase recycling and decrease trash disposal by setting new numeric recycling goals for
the city that exceed existing rates by a minimum of 25% within 5 years
♦ Implement organized collection for trash, recycling and food waste/organics
♦ Improve recycling at parks and public events
♦ Improve duration and promotion of recycling through increased City staff and
collaboration with Hennepin County
♦ Improve recycling by businesses
♦ Continue the Citywide Curbside Cleanup program, but with improved opportunities to
promote reuse and recycling
4.3 Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission
The Consultant attended the City’s monthly meeting of the Parks, Arts and Recreation
Commission (PARC) on November 13, 2013. A PARC Commissioner recommended the City
establish overall numeric goals such as:
♦ Within 5 years, parks and public events should have sufficient recycling to realize at least
a 75% reduction of materials going into the waste stream.
♦ Within 20 years there should be zero waste within parks.
It was noted that the City’s Maintenance Division staff have begun to evaluate opportunities for
additional recycling opportunities in parks. City staff has identified the need for uniform public-
space recycling containers throughout Bloomington. Education of the public will be needed to
achieve the goals.
Trash containers in the parks and on trails are currently serviced under a City contract with a
single hauler. PARC Commissioners and staff expressed that:
♦ Recycling and food waste/organics composting collection services should be added into
the City’s parks waste collection contract. Where appropriate, additional recycling
containers should be added. These new recycling containers should be readily accessible
by parks users and have instructions that are easy for the public to understand.
♦ Recycling containers should be added at all different types of parks including, but not
limited to, ball diamonds, neighborhood parks, school playgrounds, and park shelters.
♦ Frequent waste audits should be required by the City’s solid waste contractor. These
audits should be a primary means to continue to measure the effectiveness and growth of
recycling at City parks.
Individuals and community organizations are able to rent City park and recreation facilities. The
PARC Commission noted there are opportunities to amend the applications for facility rental to
require applicants to implement recycling and food waste/organics collections. These
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 11
March 2014
requirements could be modeled after similar requirements other communities have. Facility
applicants and licensed concessionaires could be required to meet new recycling standards as a
condition of the City’s approval.
The PARC Commission noted the City could offer a sliding scale of credits back on the fees
charged for events depending on how “green” they are. Another suggestion was to provide this
type of incentive program first and then move to more stringent requirements for groups and
events.
4.4 Business Organizations
A customized business survey was prepared for the commercial establishments. The online
survey was launched at the same time as the residential survey. The survey forms are in
Appendix A.
There were three responses to the business online survey. All three reported recycling at their
business. Respondents receive information about recycling from their garbage hauler. They
reported that they would recycle more materials if their property manager required them to
recycle. Other recycling improvements mentioned included:
♦ The opportunity to recycle more items such as cardboard
♦ More convenient recycling opportunities at their business (for example, dedicated
recycling containers in the “back of the store”)
♦ Better recycling containers for their customers to use (sometimes referred to as “front of
the store”).
The survey offered to provide information to obtain a grant from Hennepin County to improve
business recycling, but none of the respondents requested more information about the County
grant program.
City staff met with the Bloomington Chamber of Commerce, Public Affairs Committee to
introduce the Plan and request business input. The Chamber of Commerce put an announcement
about the City’s Plan and opportunities for comment in their electronic newsletter.
5 Bloomington Community Outreach Tools
5.1 City Webpage Dedicated to the Plan
The City has a robust, online presence for overall community information and resident outreach.
The City uses its website, Facebook, Twitter, “E-Subscribe” web service to create customized
interest group e-mail lists for notices of selected announcements (via “e-blasts”), and other social
media to inform residents and seek advice from them.
A new Bloomington Solid Waste Management Plan web page was established at the beginning
of the project in October 2013. See Figure 5-1 for a screen shot excerpt of the current Plan web
page and click on http://bloomingtonmn.gov/main_top/3_homecomm/trash/waste.htm?r=us to
see the Plan web page live.
12 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
Figure 5-1
Bloomington Web Page Dedicated Updates About to the
Solid Waste Management Plan
Source: City of Bloomington web site, WWW.BloomingtonMN.gov, January 31, 2014
Bloomington education materials and the web page are major components of the community
outreach effort for the Solid Waste Management Plan. Periodic updates of the draft Plan
documents, such as the draft goals and outline of strategies, are posted on the web page. Once
the full draft Plan is produced, it will also be posted on this web page for download, review and
comment.
One feature of the Plan web page that was posted as part of the initial launch was the
“Frequently Asked Questions” about the Plan.3 The FAQs have been well received by the
public.
5.2 Emails and Social Media
A list of interested residents signed up to receive email announcements about updates to the
Plan. Anyone who signs up for the City’s “E-Subscribe” under the specific topic “Solid Waste
Management Plan” can be automatically informed of Plan-related news.4 Subscribers to this “E-
Subscribe” service received notices about Plan-related: Open House meetings, opportunities to
provide input and the opening of the online survey. The most recent e-mail announcement about
the Plan was that the preliminary results of the second Open House on January 16 were now
available on the City’s Plan web page.
Similar announcements about Plan news and updates were also posted via the City’s Facebook
and Twitter accounts.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 13
March 2014
A special e-mail address (SolidWasteManagementPlan@BloomingtonMN.gov), monitored daily
by City staff, is available for comments, questions and dialog through-out the project. Interested
parties are also encouraged to contact directly the City’s project manager for this Plan, Jim
Gates, Deputy Director of Public Works.
5.3 City “Briefing” Newsletter
The City has an award-winning newsletter, the Bloomington “Briefing”, that is a primary source
of news, information and outreach for all matters relating to city government and services. An
article was featured in the December 2013 “Briefing” about the Plan and to help promote
attendance at the first Open House held on December 4.
6 Surveys
An online survey (Survey Monkey) tool was used to solicit, gather and analyze input from
interested residents and businesses about the Bloomington Plan. The resident survey was
available on the Plan web page via hyperlinks to the survey forms. The Bloomington Plan web
page prominently promoted responses to the surveys from December 10, 2013 through January
10, 2014. The web page banner read, “We Want Your Input.” The online survey was also
promoted through other outreach methods, including: emails; the City “Briefing” newsletter;
City Facebook and Twitter posts; and word of mouth. Some of the community organizations
such as the Master Recyclers and Composters group also pushed responses to the survey.
The same survey forms were also handed out to participants attending the first Open House held
on December 4, 2013. These were coded in the same manner as the online survey responses.
Appendix B-1 contains the quantified results in response to the multiple choice questions. Both
the online and the hard copy responses were compiled to present composite results from both
survey formats.
Appendix B-2 contains the text responses to the open-ended questions. These were typed by the
Consultant as near to their original, verbatim content as possible.
The results compare well to the National Citizens SurveyTM discussed above. The National
Citizens SurveyTM reported that about 93% of residents recycle. The slight difference may be
due to the fact that the National Citizens Survey is taken from a random sample of all
Bloomington residents while the Plan survey is a self-selected sample of individuals interested in
recycling and other solid waste topics.
7 Open Houses
7.1 The First Open House on December 4
The first Open House was held for residents and businesses on December 4, 2013 at the
Bloomington Civic Plaza 4:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. Approximately forty (40) residents attended
the meeting including two (2) persons that identified themselves as haulers (who were also
Bloomington residents). Tables were arranged for informal discussion centered on several pre-
selected topics: trash, recycling, the Citywide Curbside Cleanup, and miscellaneous solid waste
14 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
management issues. A member of Project Management Team was at each table to facilitate the
discussions among residents and take notes.
Significant themes conveyed by residents included:
♦ There are too many haulers on each street. This problem is perceived as: inefficient,
wasteful, noisy, polluting, unsafe, and damaging to the streets. There were a very high
percentage of participants that were in favor of the City pursuing organized solid waste
collection. A smaller number of participants expressed concern that organized collection
would: increase the fees for trash service, decrease service levels, and/or reduce
residents’ choice in selecting their own hauler.
♦ Participants recommended the City improve recycling. Ideas suggested included:
More items to be accepted for recycling
More frequent information about recycling
Larger recycling containers
More frequent recycling pick-ups
Better opportunities and education for recycling in multi-unit buildings
♦ Several residents mentioned how the City should have a dedicated staff position for solid
waste and recycling again.
♦ There should be improvements in businesses recycling, including a requirement that
businesses that sell recyclable goods should have drop-off bins available for their
customers to recycle those same items (for example: cans, bottles, and plastic bags).
♦ All businesses should be required to recycle and more education should be given to
businesses about recycling.
♦ More food waste/organics collection opportunities should be started for residents.
♦ Several residents talked about the new service that one hauler has begun providing for
food waste/organics collection. They expressed their hope of expanding the service
citywide.
♦ Participants also recommended more information about back yard composting.
♦ The Curbside Cleanup program is very popular. It was mentioned how more frequent
collection of bulky waste would be more convenient and might reduce illegal dumping.
♦ The two haulers present mentioned only one company now bids on the City’s Curbside
Cleanup contract. As an alternative, the City could require all licensed haulers in the City
to provide regular bulky waste collection service.
♦ Another suggestion from the haulers was to stretch out the schedule for the Curbside
Cleanup program and increase the number of days beyond the current five (5) Saturdays
only. This type of change might encourage smaller haulers to bid on the service.
7.2 The Second Open House on January 16
The second Open House was held in Civic Plaza from 4:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. on Thursday,
January 16, 2014. The Open House was advertised on the City web site and by e-mail messages
to residents that had subscribed to be notified about the Plan.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 15
March 2014
Large sheets containing the draft Plan “Goals” and “Strategies” were on easels in the Council
Chambers. Four City staff and two Foth representatives were available throughout the Open
House to explain and discuss the draft goals and outline of strategies. The draft goals and
strategies posted and handed out were the same text as released and posted on the City’s web
page on Friday, January 10, 2014 so that interested parties could review these documents before
the Open House.
Forty three (43) participants signed in at the Open House registration desk. All participants were
given blue and green dot labels to indicate the four Plan goals they considered most important
and the four strategies they believed should be given highest priority.
Figure 7-1 shows one example of the two large sheets displaying the results of Open House
participants’ dot label rankings on the draft goals.
Figure 7-1
Draft Goals: Example Large Sheet of Open House Results
(First of two large sheets of blue dot labels on the draft Goals)
16 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
Table 7-1 lists the goals most favored by participants at the second Open House.
Table 7-1
Draft Goals: Open House Participant Rankings
(Total number of blue dot labels as placed during the second Open House)
♦ Reduce road wear impacts 36
♦ Lower environmental impacts 34
♦ Improve recycling, composting, and waste reduction 31
♦ Enhance public education and awareness 18
♦ Assure all residents have adequate recycling services 11
♦ Improve hauler reporting systems 8
♦ Increase use of resource recovery facilities 8
♦ Allocate adequate staff resources 8
♦ Improve value of services 6
♦ Improve safety 6
♦ Promote local economic development 5
♦ Enhance coordination among government agencies 1
Figure 7-2 shows one example of the two large sheets displaying the results of Open House
participants’ dot label rankings on the draft Goals.
Figure 7-2
Draft Outline of Strategies: Example Large Sheet of Open House Results
(First of two large sheets of green dot labels on the draft outline of Strategies)
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 17
March 2014
Table 7-2 lists the strategies most favored by attendees. The selection of favored goals was
independent of selection of favored strategies.
Table 7-2
Draft Improvement Strategies: Open House Participant Rankings
(Total number of green dot labels as placed during the second Open House)
♦ Trash Collection Systems 46
♦ Citywide Curbside Cleanup 24
♦ Recycling 23
♦ Yard Waste Composting 17
♦ Recycling and Waste Reduction at Events and “Away from Home” Activities 16
♦ Food Waste/Organics Recovery 15
♦ City Parks and City Buildings 8
♦ Environmental Education Outreach 6
♦ Household Hazardous Waste 6
♦ Electronic Waste 5
♦ Resource Recovery (for Mixed Solid Waste) 3
♦ Source Reduction and Reuse 2
♦ Bulky Waste 1
♦ Landfilling 1
♦ Other Problem Materials 0
8 Summary of Findings
8.1 Goals and Strategies
The Consultant and City staff used the community engagement tools to develop the initial draft
goals for the Plan and the draft outline of strategies. These draft goals and draft outline of
strategies were publicized on the Plan web page on January 10, 2014 prior to the second Open
House held on January 16, 2014. These initial draft goals and outline of strategies were the basis
of discussion and comments at the second Open House. The input at the second Open House
confirmed the comments heard throughout the earlier engagement activities that reducing road
wear impacts, lowering environmental impacts and improving recycling, composting and waste
reduction are very important community goals. Open House comments confirmed residents
attending the Open House also believe enhancing public education and awareness and assuring
all residents have adequate recycling services are important goals.
Open House participants’ comments and rankings via the dot label exercise indicated clear
priorities within the outline of strategies. Their verbal comments and dot rankings directly
supported the similar priorities for the goals. Most residents that have been engaged in the Plan
community engagement process to date have strongly and consistently favored changes to the
solid waste collection systems as the top priority for the City.
At the second Open House, strong support was also expressed by participants for improvements
to recycling services and the Citywide Curbside Collection program. Other issues consistently
supported throughout the engagement process include: yard waste composting; food
waste/organics composting; and “Away from Home” recycling opportunities such as at parks,
18 • Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
March 2014
schools and businesses. The relatively low dot ranking priority for the other issues (resource
recovery, source reduction and reuse, bulky waste management, landfilling, and managing other
problem materials) is more a reflection of the intensity placed on the highly favored strategies
related to solid waste collection services and not so much a comment the other issues lack
support. All of the strategies in the outline are important elements of the overall Solid Waste
Management Plan, but Open House participants may consider these other lower priority issues as
something the City should deal with in the longer-term.
8.2 Environmental Protection
The community strongly believes in environmental protection. The Bloomington
Comprehensive Plan (2008) clearly indicates the City’s history of support for sustainable
practices including protection of natural resources and open spaces. The highly engaged and
committed volunteers within resident groups such as the Master Recyclers and Composters and
the PARC Commission are another indication of community support for sustainability issues
such as improved solid waste management. These values were clearly emphasized by
participants in the community engagement activities to-date. Environmental protection was a
common theme reflected in many of the conversations, responses to surveys and in the
comments on the draft goals and outline of strategies.
8.3 Organized Collection
The participants in the community engagement process to-date were overwhelmingly supportive
of organized solid waste collection as a critical aspect of Bloomington’s future solid waste
management efforts. Over and over, participants expressed a desire for fewer trucks in their
neighborhoods, less noise, fewer road impacts, more safety and more organized and coordinated
waste education and service delivery. There were very few comments supporting continuation of
the current open system of trash and recycling collections.
The meeting with the City’s licensed trash haulers and their comments at the first Open House
provided important balance as another perspective on the organized collection issue. Each
hauling company may have a different opinion about how the City should proceed on this issue,
but in general the haulers expressed support for the existing open hauling system. Also, City
Council members have expressed an interest in exploring how any change to organized
collection could be fair and equitable to existing haulers. Finally, the National Citizen Survey of
Bloomington residents clearly indicated a strong majority of respondents are satisfied with solid
waste, recycling and yard services provided within the City.
8.4 Educational Opportunities
In meetings and in surveys, respondents expressed the belief that increased education efforts are
needed to achieve the proposed goals and draft strategies for improved solid waste management.
Specific target audience’s recommendations include: school classes, park and athletic field
users, multiple unit housing residents, businesses and other residents. Volunteer efforts,
however, such as the Master Recyclers and Composters group, have provided some community
education. There was significant support for enhanced City-produced recycling and
composting-specific articles in the Briefing, in addition to the broad environmental articles that
are a staple of the publication.
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 19
March 2014
8.5 Waste Reduction, Recycling and Organics
Nearly all community engagement participants have expressed support for specific waste
reduction, recycling and organics collection and composting actions in the Plan. Residents
repeatedly stated these three activities should be strongly represented in the Plan. Many good
ideas for recommended tactics were suggested to improve waste reduction, recycling and
organics collection systems, including “Away from Home Recycling.”
8.6 Revision of Ordinances
Participants stated there is a need for enforcement of the City’s existing ordinances. The City
has ordinances that: require recycling by businesses and residents; require trash haulers to
provide specific services; and outline City responsibilities.
Many participants in the engagement process were unaware of the specific ordinance
requirements. One reason expressed is that some residents and businesses have observed
violations of the ordinance requirements, but had not observed the enforcement activities that
were made by the City. Examples presented by participants included the lack of recycling by
businesses, the lack of recycling at multiple unit properties, trash hauler collection on the
“wrong” days in the collection zones, and illegal dumping violations. Participants stated that
they are hoping more City staff resources will be allocated to compliance enforcement activities.
8.7 Citywide Curbside Cleanup
The Citywide Curbside Cleanup is a highly valued service. Almost without exception, residents
and businesses expressed support for the Curbside Cleanup program. However, there is
widespread recognition the program is expensive and there may be more cost-effective ways to
operate it. There is also recognition that a once a year effort does not support the year-round
needs for large item, bulky waste or construction and demolition disposal, or for brush and limb
disposal. Bridging, a non-profit, was suggested as an outlet for usable but unwanted furntiture.
There were suggestions that such bulky item collection services could be part of an organized
collection system in the City, resulting in integrated solid waste management strategies. There
were also specific tactics recommended to reduce scavenging at the Curbside Cleanup and to
make the competitive procurement process more attractive to other haulers.
8.8 City Staffing Resources
Bloomington had a staff person until 2009 with a portion of time dedicated to recycling and solid
waste issues. This City staff member was tasked with providing: education about recycling and
waste reduction and preparation of recycling reports required by the County. Many participants
recommended that adequate City staff be allocated to such solid waste management activities.
Some of these participants simply recommended that the City should fill a recycling education
position.