MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE HAMILTON COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
POLICY COMMITTEE
 

JANUARY 9, 2003

DATE: January 9, 2003

TIME: 2:00 pm

PLACE: Hamilton County Department of Environmental Services
250 William Howard Taft Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45219

PRESENT: Policy Committee Members

Keith Corman, Township Representative, Vice Chair
Tony DiPuccio, Generator Representative
Dr. Carl Evert, General Interest Member
Karl Graham, Representative of Largest Municipality
Tim Ingram, Hamilton County General Health District Representative
Dr. James O’Reilly, Public Member
Todd Portune, County Commissioner, Chair
Larry Riddle, Ex-Officio Member
Jeffrey W. Aluotto, Solid Waste Manager
Cory Chadwick, Director
Sarah Dowers, Public Affairs Coordinator
Holly Christmann, Community Specialist
Christy Kellner, Business Specialist
Ali Khodadad, Operations Coordinator
Susan Schumacher, Secretary, Clerk
Tammy Wenhame, Public Affairs Specialist
Others In Attendance
Karen Ball, Commissioner Portune’s Aid
Martha Gentry, City of Cincinnati
Heather Harlow, Keep Cincinnati Beautiful
Dan McCabe, Environmental Enterprises
Bob Orr, CSI Waste Services

I. CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Portune called the meeting to order at 2:05 pm and welcomed everyone. Mr. Portune stated that there was a new County Commissioner; Phil Heimlich. Mr. Portune has expressed interest in continuing as Chair on the Policy Committee. To date, organizational decisions have not yet been made and Mr. Portune expects a decision within the next week. In the interim, he wanted to offer his thanks and praise to everyone for the past two years in terms of great work in case he did not get to continue as Chair of the Policy Committee.

II. CLERK'S REPORT

A. Approval of Minutes - November 14, 2002Mr. Graham moved to approve the November 14, 2002 minutes. Dr. O’Reilly seconded. All were in favor and the minutes were approved by acclamation.

B. Additions/Changes to the Agenda

Under Informational Items add the following:

-District Organization Update

-District Contract Update

III. FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT

A. Finance SubCommittee Report - January 9, 2003

Mr. Graham stated that revenues have increased approximately $90,000 compared to 2001 and it looked as if year end revenues would be $2.7-$2.75 million. The Finance SubCommittee reviewed the December, 2002 purchase orders and the RW Contract and UC Survey was discussed.

The Finance SubCommittee discussed the purpose of the Committee and possible ways to increase productivity (less meetings, budget reviews, etc.). This item will be brought back for further discussion. B. Approval of Disbursements - Resolution SWR 01/2003

The Finance SubCommittee reviewed the expenditures and recommended approval of SWR 01/2003 which covers expenditures from November 1 - December 31, 2002. Mr. Graham motioned approval of SWR 01/2003. Dr. O’Reilly seconded and SWR 01/2003 was approved by acclamation.

IV. POLICY ITEMS

A. City of Cincinnati’s Budget on Recycling and Yardwaste

Mr. Aluotto stated that everyone should have been informed that the City of Cincinnati is looking at discontinuing their recycling and yardwaste programs in 2004 pending finding new revenues, better economic outlooks, cost reduction, etc.

Mr. Aluotto discussed the crucial importance of retaining both these items to the District’s recycling activities as outlined in the Plan.

Mr. Aluotto stated that Staff met with City Staff (Karl Graham, Dr. Brock, Denny Meyer) to try and assist them in developing a recycling program that may be more compatible with their financial situation. Mr. Aluotto stated that there is progress being made at the current time and is optimistic that Staff will be able to identify a reasonable alternative for them.

Mr. Portune asked Mr. Aluotto if he had received any policy guidance from the Mayor or Council which would suggest what the City’s long range thinking would be in terms of compatibility issues because he feels that there has been a decided philosophical shift in the full service operation of the City. Mr. Graham stated that the Mayor, City Manager, and Council have made public statements along the lines of “although budgets and financial situations are in bad shape, they would like to continue the programs in 2004 if the overall revenues are there to be approved”. Council passed a motion, signed by the Mayor, with the budget that indicated that the City was committed that the first $2 million in savings from managed competition efforts would go for curbside recycling and yardwaste management.

Dr. O’Reilly moved that Staff be directed to report back to the Policy Committee at the next meeting regarding what steps the Solid Waste Policy Committee can take to interact directly with City policy makers such as the Mayor and City Manager to discuss directly with them how the Policy Committee can be of assistance.

Mr. Aluotto stated that District Staff will be working with the City to assist them in developing cost-effective alternatives for providing curbside recycling. In addition, the City’s yardwaste program should be examined to determine more cost-effective means of providing that service. District Staff is currently working with RW Beck to determine how the scope of the second phase of the existing market development study could be altered to provide that service to the City. The District had already contracted with RW Beck to increase diversion through organics.

The District budgeted $26,000 for Phase II of the study this year and RW Beck came back with $51,000 to perform a cost analysis of the yardwaste program in the City of Cincinnati and identify alternative strategies. Mr. Portune asked Mr. Aluotto if he was satisfied with the 100% increase in cost. Mr. Aluotto stated that he was based upon the fact that this project represents an entirely new scope, and wished there was more time so other consultants could be interviewed but the District needs to move rather quickly on this issue.

Mr. DiPuccio asked what the impact on the District would be if the City’s recycling program went away; what the District’s options were. Mr. Aluotto stated that if the City’s recycling program were to go away, if the District is still under the current Plan, this would be viewed as a material change of circumstances and the State would require the District to re-write the Plan. The District could not continue with the existing Plan without the City of Cincinnati’s program. Mr. Aluotto discussed very specific details regarding the City’s tonnages and the Plan.

Mr. Portune moved to approve the Staff Recommendation amending it to reflect the full amount of $51,000. Mr. Corman seconded. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

Below is the amended Staff Recommendation:

Municipal yardwaste collected by the City of Cincinnati amounts to approximately 10,000 tons each year. As such, it is vitally important to the District in terms of maintaining a waste reduction rate above 25%. Therefore, District Staff would recommend that the existing RW Beck Market Development Project scope be altered to determine more cost-effective means of keeping this material out of the landfill not to exceed $51,000. If, in fact, the scope of that project cannot be altered, Staff would recommend that the project be temporarily put on hold so that funding may be secured to initiate a project specifically focusing on yardwaste collection in the City of Cincinnati.

Dr. O’Reilly restated his earlier motion: He moves that the District Staff prepare for a meeting with City of Cincinnati staff and report to the Policy Committee during February regarding a high level interaction in March between this committee and the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Cincinnati. The goal of such a high level meeting will be to deliver a positive statement in support of the continuation of curbside recycling in the City.

Mr. Corman seconded; Mr. Graham and Dr. Evert abstained. Mr. Graham abstained due to working for the City and Dr. Evert abstained due to feeling as though City Council has been notified of the situation from the very first consideration. Everyone else was in favor and the motion was approved.

B. Integrated Alternative Waste Management Program

Mr. Aluotto discussed the background regarding IAWMP and stated that he had hoped to have a Staff Recommendation by today but hasn’t received information from Rumpke or OEPA.

Mr. Aluotto also discussed the review process that OEPA has incorporated for IAWMP Projects.

Mr. Aluotto stated that Rumpke has proposed a project in cooperation with MSD to do an IAWMP project. Mr. Riddle discussed specific information regarding the Rumpke project and an question and answer period ensued.

Mr. Aluotto stated that the main reason he brought this up as a Policy Item is because OEPA, in the past, has told the District that they will review them from an environmental standpoint, the Director will then make the determination if the state and district fees will be waived on the projects. The District does not have the authority to waive their own fees. In the past, the District was informed that correspondence would be forwarded informing the District as to how the Director was leaning towards deciding on these projects from an environmental standpoint as well as a waiver of the fees. Once the District receives information from OEPA, the Policy Committee would recommend, back to the Director, as to whether it would support the waiving of those fees.

An question and answer session ensued regarding the proposed Rumpke project.

Residential Reduction Assistance Grants

Mr. Aluotto discussed the history and guidelines behind the RRA Grants. The Policy Committee was provided a handout outlining the District’s recommendations for funding in 2003. Ms. Christmann briefly discussed each political subdivision/not-for-profit applicant and project summary.

Mr. Portune asked Mr. Aluotto if this item was to be voted on today. Mr. Aluotto stated yes. Mr. Portune stated that since this item had just been given to the Policy Committee and one not-for-profit organization was “to be discussed” in terms of recommended funding, he suggested tabling this item so the Policy Committee could throughly review the recommendations.

Dr. O’Reilly requested a projection of the 2004 RRI rebate amounts if the amount increases in the landfill and decreases from recycling. Specifically, if, in the year 2004, amounts that are now being recycled as part of the City of Cincinnati’s curbside, go into the landfill instead, then let it be projected that there will be a certain amount of increase in the District’s income.

Mr. Aluotto stated that other communities have requested the same thing but the problem with that scenario is that OEPA has communicated that if the City’s program is cut, the District would need to re-write the Plan and it is unknown if the existing RRI program would survive the re-write. Dr. O’Reilly reiterated his request and Mr. Aluotto stated that the District would send the projections to the Policy Committee.

V.INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

A. District’s Ability to Designate Facilities

Mr. Aluotto stated that as a previous Policy Committee meeting, District Staff was asked to obtain a Prosecutor’s Opinion on whether, based upon the current language in the Solid Waste Management Plan, gives the District the authority to designate facilities.

The language is as follows:

"The Board of Hamilton County Commissioners (The Board) acting as Directors of the Hamilton County Solid Waste Management District is hereby authorized to designate solid waste management facilities in accordance with Section 343.014 of the Ohio Revised Code. At present time, the Board waives this authorization and will allow any industry, political subdivision and solid waste hauler to use any solid waste management facility."

Mr. Aluotto stated that Prosecutor’s Office was of the opinion that OEPA was the more logical source to direct that question because they were the regulatory agency for the District. The District forwarded the question to OEPA and while agreeing that the District’s language was ambiguous, the language would not be challenged if the District chose to enter into designation. This is not to say that anyone else would not challenge it.

Dr. O’Reilly stated that because the County Commissioners are represented by the Prosecutor, it is his view that the Commissioners would have to vote to change what they had done previously when they stated in the Plan “The Board waives this authorization”. Dr. O’Reilly stated that he would like a letter from the Prosecutor stating that the Board of County Commissioners would have to vote to waive or that the waiver could be done at some level below the Board.

Mr. Aluotto stated that the reaction he is getting from the Prosecutor’s Office is that they would defer to OEPA on that decision and asked Dr. O’Reilly if correspondence to that effect would suffice. Dr. O’Reilly stated that he understands why they would rather have the regulators do it. As mere capacity advisors to the County Commission, he thinks it would be timely for the County Commission to get advice of whether the County Commissioners will have to vote to designate. Mr. Aluotto concurred.

B. ODNR Advertising Campaign

Mr. Aluotto stated that on January 7, 2003, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources kicked off its new statewide advertising campaign entitled “Recycling: It’s Good for the Bottle, It’s Good for the Can”. A media kick-off was held at Rumpke’s MRF. This campaign will air on radio and television stations across the State beginning this month. The District will be allocating advertising dollars toward this campaign in order to boost the local visibility of these ads which will run on Channel 9.

This campaign is an effort by ODNR to “re-energize” the energy around recycling around the State.

The Policy Committee viewed the commercials that will be airing locally starting January 13 running through March 13, 2003 and then again in June-July, 2003. Radio time was also purchased and that the District did not contribute funding to this outlet. District funding did not cover the airing in June and July so the District is actively searching for private sector funding. The District has had a significant amount of interest from private sector entities from around the country.

A brief question and answer session ensued regarding specifics of the commercials.

C. 2003 Recycle, Ohio! Grant Award Winners

Mr. Aluotto discussed the history behind the Recycle, Ohio grant and what the grants purpose was. Following is the 2003 Recycle, Ohio grant recipients: Forest Park, City of Norwood, City of Madeira, City of Springdale, Anderson Township Park District, Springfield Township, Village of Lockland, Delhi Township Park Board, City of Reading, City of Harrison, Hamilton County Engineer, and Whitewater Township.

Mr. Aluotto stated that the grant amounts this year were significantly less than previous years due to ODNR’s shift in management which has resulted in different funding decisions this year. The different funding decisions have impacted some of the traditional grantees. The District met with ODNR to discuss their decisions and due to ODNR changing their philosophy in funding decisions, the grant decisions are final.

A discussion ensued regarding ODNR’s decision making practices.

District Organization Update

Mr. Aluotto stated that the District’s website (www.hcdoes.org) has been re-done. Mr. Aluotto complimented and thanked Ms. Wenhame for all of her work. Mr. Aluotto discussed a new program, called “The Treasure Chest” that is now on the website.

District Contracts Update

Mr. Aluotto stated that the Yardwaste contract expires on January 11, 2003. In the existing contract, the District has the opportunity for an extension. Traditionally, when the District has this opportunity, Staff has rolled it over. If there were not any objections from the Policy Committee, the District is going to roll the contract into 2003.

Mr. Aluotto stated that the District has received new bids from HHM contractors that were re-bid and will be moving forward with analyzing and awarding that contract within the next month.

TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS IAWMP, Residential Reduction Assistance Grants, District’s Ability to Designate Prosecutor Opinion, City’s Budget on Yardwaste

VII. POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS’ COMMENTS

A brief discussion ensued regarding OEM and its status.

Mr. Riddle requested a copy of the Scope of Services for the RW Beck contract.

Mr. DiPuccio asked if the District had heard anything back from RPC. Mr. Aluotto stated no, and that the last he heard, this item was tabled for further discussion.

VIII. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Ms. Harlow passed out a copy of Keep Cincinnati Beautiful’s annual report, their newsletter, their Town Hall Meeting invitation, the Great American Clean-Up and discussed each item.

Keep Cincinnati Beautiful’s funding was also discussed. IX. UPCOMING DISTRICT MEETINGS

The next Policy Committee meeting is scheduled for 2:00 pm on Thursday, March 13, 2003 at Hamilton County Department of Environmental Services located at 250 William Howard Taft Road.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned by acclamation at 3:28 pm.