Dear Mayor and City Council members,
The Sierra Club Huron Valley Group has many objections to the proposed Solid Waste Management Plan, on both process and content grounds. I and others will be testifying against the proposal at your working session tomorrow. Here is a summary of some of our objections. I have a more detailed version that I will be happy to share with anyone who wants a closer look.
We have previously urged you to direct staff to repair the MRF quickly, utilizing either the plan Recycle Ann Arbor presented or a similar plan, and to join the county's waste authority without further delay, and we once again urge you to do so.
I and the HVG stand ready to work with you to develop a better solid waste plan, one that serves community values and works with the city's climate action goals.
Respectfully Yours,
Dan Ezekiel
Chair, Executive Committee
Huron Valley Group
Sierra Club
Overview
The City of Ann Arbor’s draft Solid Waste Resources Management Plan (SWRMP) fails to address the core problems in the City’s solid waste system, and the process to develop the SWRMP failed to build community support for the plan.
While there are some useful consensus recommendations in the draft plan, there are also many problematic proposals. Fundamentally, the draft SWRMP disinvests in the community’s materials recovery assets, which have been developed in partnership with for-profit and nonprofit organizations over more than 30 years, and which are more important than ever in the current recycling environment.
The Key to a High-Quality Recycling Program in Today’s Economy
The most important factor in the success of a modern recycling program is the production of high-quality materials, and communities face major obstacles to accomplishing that goal -- the multiplicity of plastic packaging materials; the absence of recyclability standards; the financial disincentives to recycle. To overcome those obstacles, communities need to prioritize material quality; cultivate relationships with end-markets; use best practices in handling materials; provide transparency to the community about what happens to materials; and conduct public education at every stage of the process -- from the household to the classroom to the curbside to the MRF -- promoting a “zero waste” culture instead of a “throwaway” society.
Problems with the SWRMP
1 The SWRMP doesn’t fix the MRF. The City’s MRF has been closed for three years, forcing huge financial expense on the City, diminished sorting capacity on the region, and added carbon emissions on the planet. The plan barely analyzes these problems, and fails to prioritize them at all. Both the SWRMP, and the current RFP for processing services, do not prioritize the re-opening of the MRF. This is not acceptable.
2 The SWRMP doesn’t fix the Drop-Off Station. The City’s recycling drop-off station has been in need of replacement for 15 years. Land was purchased for a new facility over a decade ago, and capital funds were earmarked for the project, yet the project has not materialized. The plan barely analyzes this problem, fails to prioritize it, and explicitly directs the City to NOT play a leadership role in addressing it. This is not acceptable.
3 The SWRMP eliminates the role for Recycle Ann Arbor. Virtually every positive aspect of recycling services in Ann Arbor has been provided by Recycle Ann Arbor in the 41 years since RAA started curbside collection in our community. That makes it all the more astonishing that the SWRMP barely mentions RAA in its discussion of the City’s recycling history, and its current programs. It’s equally astonishing that the SWRMP proposes to eliminate RAA’s role in providing community services – without even comparing prices in a real-world bidding process. Currently, the residential sector has high recovery rates and extremely high (>90%) resident support. This part of Ann Arbor’s solid waste system ain’t broke, so let’s not try to fix it.
By eliminating a role for RAA, the SWRMP undermines the credibility of the City’s recycling program. RAA has credibility with Ann Arbor residents that is indispensable in today’s recycling environment. The recent disruption in U.S. recycling markets has led people around the country to question whether their recyclables actually get recycled, and whether recycling is worth it or not. As a mission-based nonprofit recycler with thousands of community supporters, RAA has a reputation for integrity that gives Ann Arbor recyclers confidence that they’re doing the right thing.
4 We object to several other SWRMP recommendations. These include bulky waste collection, virtually all of the Commercial sector recommendations, virtually all of the Education recommendations, and both of the Financing recommendations.
5 We support an alternative way of “consolidating” solid waste services – by material stream, instead of service sector. Municipal recycling is not like waste disposal – it’s a key part of a supply chain for industrial materials. The SWRMP advisory committee suggested this approach multiple times in the planning process. In spite of many examples of high-performing communities that “consolidate” their services by value stream (i.e., recyclables, organics, waste), this approach was not even considered.
6 The plan includes no zero waste proposals, in spite of a lengthy set of suggestions offered early in the process by the SWRMP advisory committee. The City could have built strong community support behind a process that seriously explored the set of proposals offered by advisory committee members, but the letter was received, acknowledged, and then essentially ignored. These proposals should be included in the recommendations.
As stated earlier, there are aspects of this plan that we do support. We support year-round organics collection, and the proposals to improve downtown services. These parts of the plan have broad support, and they should be pursued further. There are other recommendations in the plan -- e.g., commercial organics, commercial recycling -- that we could support if the implementation measures were significantly changed, particularly if the “material stream” consolidation approach were adopted.