Shoreline Council Monday to vote on fines for improper recycling
Thursday, March 28, 2019
 |
| Shoreline City Hall Photo by Mike Remarcke |
The agenda for the April 1, 2019 Shoreline City Council Meeting includes four action items:
1. Public Hearing and Discussion of the 2020-2025 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)
State law requires cities to prepare and adopt a comprehensive 6-year TIP. This required hearing provides the opportunity for public feedback. This is the only hearing scheduled.
2. Approval of Amendment # 1 to the City’s 2017 – 2027 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Contract with Recology CleanScapes Inc.
This Plan to Reduce Contamination includes additional outreach, education and incentives that support reducing contamination at collection, increasing monitoring and rejection of unacceptable material at the curb, development of a contamination fee and, in extreme cases, removing recycling cart/containers from customers unable or unwilling to use the system properly.
3. Adoption of Ordinance No. 858 - Amending SMC 3.01.500 Solid Waste Rate Schedule to Reflect Amendment # 1 to the City’s 2017–2027 Comprehensive Garbage, Recyclables, and Compostables Collection Contract with Recology CleanScapes Inc
Aligning SMC with changes in contract with Recology.
4. Adoption of Ordinance No. 839 – Amending the Development Code to Expand the Deep Green Incentive Program (DGIP)Rather than expand the mandated DGIP to other commercial zoning districts, Ordinance 839 provides incentives outside of the MUR zoning districts
Details available online. Watch the meeting online.
--Pam Cross
Posts
3 comments:
Fines for "improper recycling"??? For a minute there I thought I was reading The Onion, but apparently not.
What's absurd about this? There are fines and other penalties for improper use (abuse) of many services. And there are a number of ways that people routinely recycle improperly, which have the risk of tainting a whole load of recycled goods. If the load is ruined, there's no value in it as raw material and the economics of providing the service are upended.
Put more generally, improper recycling is real and commonplace, and causes financial impact that threatens the economic viability of operating the service at all. It makes complete sense.
Are we going to repeat Seattle's failure? Their nearly identical tag/fee for recycling contamination got struck down in court three years ago, due to risk of unconstitutional search. (A positive opt-in option, e.g. discount for meeting the standard, would pass the legal test.)
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2815303/ORDER-on-CROSS-MOTIONS-for-SUMMARY-JUDGMENT-FINAL.pdf
https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/cities-composting-recycling-enforcement-seattle
Post a Comment