Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
01/21/1991 - Packet
AGENDA UTILITY & FRANCHISE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MONDAY, JANUARY 21, 1991 - 7:00 PM TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL CONFERENCE ROOM 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OR 1. CALL TO ORDER 2 . ROLL CALL: McREYNOLDS BARRETT SULLIVAN IRWIN JACOBS WOGEN VACANCY 3. Approve Minutes 4 . Construction Site Cleanup • Howard Washburn, Construction Cleanup, Inc. • Representative from Oregon Home Builders Association. 5. Residential Hazardous Waste Collection Report • Tom Miller, Miller's Sanitary Service 6. Solid Waste Ordinance Work Session • Discussion of hauler's proposed language 7 . Other business 8. Date for next meeting 9. Adjournment TO ENSURE A QUORUM TO CONDUCT BUSINESS, PLEASE CALL LIZ NEWTON AT 639-4171, EXTENSION 308 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. h:1ogin\debbie\ut&f-a • WASHINGTON 7 ft,,,,..� COUNTY, OREGON January 21, 1991 Loreen Edin Administrative Services City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR. 97223 Dear Loreen: I undersand that the City of Tigard will be considering action relating to special waste haulers operating within the city. As we have discussed, the Washington County Waste Reduction Technical Committee is reviewing the issue of local government authority over special waste collection. It has been the intent of the Committee to review the entire solid waste stream as defined by ORS 459 . 005 (18) and to recommend solid waste management changes that will include local government control over all solid waste hauling. Special wastes meets the State definition and includes select wastes that are not typically found on commercial or residential collection routes. The Committee is especially interested in construction, demolition and land clearing debris. These three items account for a large portion of the wastestream in the County that is presently not fully managed but meet the definition of solid waste under Oregon Statute. The hauling of construction, demo or land clearing debris that is neither bulky nor heavy is the responsibility of the franchised haulers. The Committee expects to make no recommendations to change this area of hauling responsibility. This conforms with most city/County codes that specify that all solid waste hauling is to be provided by designated franchise haulers. When specific solid wastes need special equipment for hauling, local governments have not strictly enforced the franchise code. Heavy or bulky construction, demo or land clearing debris has traditionally been hauled by non-franchised companies using dump trucks or trailers that are constructed to handle this type of load. It has not yet been determined by the Committee the method to be used to bring all solid waste hauling under full authority of each local government. It is assumed that first priority for service will continue with the existing franchised haulers and only under defined extraordinary exceptions would other companies be allowed to provide any service. Depaitment of Health & Human Services 155 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 VMC Nutrition Program: (503) 640.3555 TDD: (503) 648-8601 Health Services: (503) 648-8881 Administration & Planning: (503) 693-4402 Environmental Health: (503) 648-8722 While much work is to be done on totally integrating the solid waste system for each local government, the Waste Reduction Committee recognizes the leading role the City of Tigard is providing in special waste regulation. Please call me at 648-8722 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 44ai Bill Martin Recycling Coordinator cc. Washington County Wasteshed Waste Reduction Technical Committee 0 0 PL SE BRING NG YOUR COPY OF THE S R SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE PROPOSED BY HAULERS DATED 11/28/90 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Utility & Franchise Committee FROM: Loreen Edin Q� DATE: December 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Agenda Item # 4 - CONSTRUCTION SITE CLEAN-UP Over the last couple of years, this issue has been dealt with by Lake Oswego, Tualatin, and Beaverton. They currently require solid waste (including construction debris) to be hauled by franchised haulers. However, I understand that this issue is being discussed by the Washington County Wasteshed Waste Reduction Technical Committee at this time. In talking with Bill Martin, Washington County's Recycling Coordinator, it appears that cities County-wide are considering franchising construction site cleanup haulers to help finance recycling and waste reduction mandates from Metro. This is proposed to be included in Year 2 of the Waste Reduction Plan. A draft of the Year 2 goals should be available for cities to review County-wide in March. Since I now serve as Tigard's representative on the Technical Committee, I will keep you updated on this issue as more information is available. I have enclosed background material from earlier U&F Committee meeting packets that deal with construction debris hauling. Attached are: o A memorandum from the City Attorney's office discussing the construction cleanup issue dated 5/3/90; and o An excerpt from the 9/90 U&F Committee minutes dealing with third party haulers. le/ms O'DONNELL, RAMIS, ELLIOTT& CREW JEFF H.BACHRACH ATTORNEYS AT LAW CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE CHARLES E.CORRIGAN• BALLOW&WRIGHT BUILDING 181 N.Grant,Suite 202 STEPHEN F.CREW 1727 N.W.Hoyt Street Canby.Oregon 97013 KENNETH M.ELLIOTT (503)2664149 KENNETH H.FOX Portland,Oregon 97209 4412 03) PHILLIP E.GRILLO (5 FAX(503)(503)243 2 3 REESE P.HASTINGS -2 944 GARY M.GEORGEFF• WILLIAM A.MONAHAN ROBERT J.McGAUGHEY• MARK P.O'DONNELL PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE Special Counsel DENNIS M.PATERSON III TIMOTHY V.RAMIS SHEILA C.RIDGWAY• WILLIAM J.STALNAKER ' JJ 'AMt Admitted to Practice MEMORANDUM 3 r r'S I• in State of Wa%hington Jt DATE: May 3, 1990 TO: Pat Riley, City Manager Gerry McReynolds, Chairman of Utilities & Franchise Committee Coy Humphrey, Code Enforcement Officer FROM: Phillip E. Grillo, City Attorney's Office RE: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues ------------------------------------------------------ BACKGROUND This matter has previously come to the attention of Coy Humphrey, Tigard Code Enforcement Officer, from nonfranchised individuals wishing to haul solid waste from construction sites. The city's initial position was that the city's garbage franchise ordinance did not allow non-franchise parties to haul solid waste from construction sites. A construction cleanup firm was subsequently cited for hauling construction waste in violation of the ordinance. Later, in February and again in March, 1990, this issue came before the Utility and Franchise Committee. Enforcement of the previously mentioned complaint was delayed until various parties could present their interpretations of the ordinance to the city for further consideration. On March 16, 1990, Charles Hales of the Metropolitan Homebuilders Association submitted materials to the city. On April 23, 1990, Mary Ellen Page of Kell, Alterman & Runstein submitted materials to the city on behalf of the franchised haulers. This opinion considers the arguments made by these parties, the intent and language of the current ordinance, and the realities of a construction process. APPLICABLE CODE PROVISIONS Section 11.04.040 grants exclusive franchises to various haulers in order to provide solid waste service within certain areas of the city. Subsection 11.04.040(d) (6) sets out the exception to the Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues May 3, 1990 Page 2 franchise ordinance which applies here. That section provides that nothing in the franchise shall: "Prohibit a contractor employed to demolish, construct, or remodel a building or structure, including but not limited to land clearing operations and construction waste, from hauling waste created in connection with such employment in equipment owned by the contractor and operated by contractor's employees;" It is also relevant to note that Section 11.04.020(a) sets out various policy statements as a general guide for interpreting the purposes of the ordinance. ISSUE Does Section 11.04.040(4) (6) prevent non-franchised cleanup companies from hauling construction related waste from building sites within the city? ANSWER Yes, unless the cleanup company can demonstrate to the city that: 1. The company is a "contractor" within the meaning of ORS Chapter 701; 2. The "contractor" is more than a mere hauler of construction waste. There must be a reasonable connection between the hauler's services and some aspect of either the demolition, construction or remodeling of a building or a land-clearing operation; 3 . The "contractor" hauls construction waste in equipment owned by that contractor and operated by that contractor's employees. DISCUSSION The so-called "construction waste exception" lends itself to a variety of interpretations. On one hand, the exception can be read in a restrictive manner that only permits individual contractors to cleanup the waste they themselves have generated. For instance, framing contractors would be permitted to cleanup framing debris, plumbing contractors would cleanup plumbing debris, and so on. On the other hand, the ordinance can be read broadly to allow anyone � a Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues May 3, 1990 Page 3 who might pass muster as a "contractor" to come onto a construction site, cleanup the construction debris, and haul it away. This opinion attempts to identify the rights and interests of the various parties involved, to give effect to the entire ordinance, and to acknowledge the realities of modern construction practices. The franchise haulers have a right under the ordinance to a stable rate base. The public has a right to reasonable rates and consistent service. The building contractor and other businesses have a right to pursue opportunities to innovate and add value .to their property within the confines of applicable law. The reality of the construction process is that it does not generate debris in discrete batches. Rather, the construction process is characterized by a series of overlapping operations, usually carried on by a number of subcontractors. The debris they generate becomes mixed over time. It makes very little economic or practical sense to require each subcontractor to sort through the debris and to only dispose of their own material. In fact, if this were the case, this exception would be impractical. If the "construction waste exception" is to have any practical meaning under the ordinance, it must allow a subcontractor to gather the debris on the site, cleanup the property, and dispose of the material using that contractor's equipment and employees. This scenario is different than merely allowing a subcontractor to pick up debris and haul it away. The former recognizes the reality of the construction process and carries out the intent of the ordinance, while the latter conflicts with the purpose of the ordinance. The exception found at Section 11.04.040(d) (6) contains three distinct clauses. I have separated those clauses into three criteria described below. In order for a cleanup company to pass muster under the "construction debris exception": 1. The company must be a "contractor" within the meaning of ORS Chapter 701. The code itself does not define e 'ne the term "contractor. " The dictionary decision does not provide any meaningful guidance. However, ORS 701.005(2) provides an appropriate definition that can be used by the city to interpret its use of the term "contractor" in this context: Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues May 3, 1990 Page 4 Contractor"' means a person who undertakes or offers to undertake or submits a bid to construct, alter, repair, and to, subtract from, improve, move, wreck, or demolish, for another, any building, highway, road, railroad, excavation or other structure, project, development or improvement attached to real estate or to do any part thereof. " Under this definition, so-called "cleanup companies" who registered with the Building Board, may be considered cleanup "contractors" for purposes of this ordinance. The fact that these contractors are registered and subject to regulation by the state, helps carry out the intent of the ordinance, since these contractors are subject to recourse if they do not perform in a reliable and workmanlike manner. Pride Disposal argues, through its counsel, that the cleanup companies are not employed to demolish, construct or remodel any building. Although, Pride does not offer any analysis in support of its conclusion, their point is well taken. However, the ordinance itself speaks to this issue in the following clause: 2. The "contractor" must be more than a mere hauler of construction waste. There must be a reasonable connection between the hauler's services and some aspect of either the demolition, construction or remodeling of a building or a land-clearing operation. The ordinance does not authorize subcontractors to merely haul construction debris. In order to qualify for the franchise exception, a cleanup company must provide other services related to the construction process. Examples of such "connections" to the construction process include but are not limited to: sweeping and vacuuming the wall cavities, and heating vents after rough plumbing and electrical work; sweeping floors, vacuuming carpets and performing a final scrap- out of the job site; and sweeping the garage, cleaning the driveway and clearing landscaped areas. To the extent a cleanup company is engaged in one or more of the above-mentioned activities, it satisfies the "connection" requirement in the ordinance. Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues May 3, 1990 Page 5 3. The "contractor" must haul construction waste in equipment owned by that contractor and operated by that contractor's employees. This requirement is self explanatory. I interpret the clause to require a contractor to actually own their own equipment and have it operated by one or more of their own employees. A contractor that performs the services mentioned above may not take advantage of this exception if he later subcontracts the hauling of this debris to another independent contractor. SUMMARY I have purposely provided you with an opinion that is perhaps more encompassing than expected. In my opinion, this is the first of many solid waste issues that the city will be facing in the coming months. These issues inherently contain both legal and policy questions. The franchise agreement now in place was adopted in 1979 with minor amendments in 1987. There have been major changes in the state and federal law which impact the assumptions and procedures set out in this ordinance. For example, as of 1983 in Oregon, haulers are required to provide curbside recycling opportunities. Today, many businesses are considering the use of innovative recycling techniques and other solid waste related processes that may not fit within our existing franchise agreements. A considerable amount of effort went into the preparation of this ordinance in 1979. However, changing circumstances and the passage of time may require the city to re- examine its policies. I have one additional concern. My awareness of illegal dumping practices causes me to question whether construction cleanup companies actually dump their construction debris into authorized landfills. If these cleanup companies operate on a tight margin, they may attempt to avoid paying the tipping fee at authorized landfills by disposing of the debris improperly. The city has a duty to ensure that these wastes are disposed of in a lawful manner. In that regard, I recommend that the city consider the development of a permit system for cleanup contractors that would ensure that these wastes are disposed of properly. I would be happy to prepare such an ordinance and resolution establishing this procedure and setting permit fees if the city is so inclined. Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues May 3, 1990 Page 6 In my opinion, so-called "cleanup companies" cannot haul construction related waste from the building sites unless they demonstrate to the city that they can meet the three criteria described in Section 11.04.040(d) (6) of the Tigard Municipal Code. A permit process should be established to regulate the disposal practices of cleanup companies that fall under this exception. PEG/lf peg\tigard\clearxwp.met Haulers - Earlier discussion 6. mrd Party Haul agreed to Permit process - Larry brought pictures Lee: For good reasons use franchise process - now have scmeone who could be dumping anywhere - no control over Phil: Ordinance doesn't prohibit contractors from hauling waste. Lee: Not arguing about sub-contractors hauling Phil Problem is in ordinance Lee: concerned about a person who is only hauling waste. Phil: must have scene connection with construction - gut reaction- narrow interpretation of ordinance nm: For years, don't mess with people who generate waste. could we add scanething about "generating waste" Jerry: We've got a guy who is doing this and was cited by coy for it. Hcene builders. Agreeing that the man is like sheet rockers. Can't interpret ordinance can only go to court and defend - but need an interpretation. Lee: Would rather close loophole than and put in permit process. Phil: Zhao loopholes 1) Mat is contractor; 2) what is hauling incidental to construction. Tam: Still bare problem - need to amend ordinance to clarify it. Phil: Agreed Tcm: Don't think we need a whole new permitting system - have identified weakness. Jetty: Should we do permit or plug holes Eldon, Don, Becka - plug holes Phil: only real permit - if let contractor dispose of waste need to be sure that waste is being disposed of properly Jerry: What else should be taken care of? nen: could look and see what we find. Could be part of enforcement process. Adlik Am Ll CITY OF TIGARD OREGON December 12, 1990 Mr. Nick Vidan, President Vidan & Sons Construction, Inc. 5914 N.E. 42nd Portland, OR 97218 Dear Mr. Vidan: Thank you for your recent letters to Mayor Edwards and me noting your concerns with regard to the operation of construction scrapping businesses in the City of Tigard. This, and related issues, are being evaluated by the Tigard Utility and Franchise Committee. We appreciate your taking the time to express your concerns. Your letter has been forwarded to the Committee's staff liaison. If you have any questions or need information, please do not hesitate to contact me. . Sincerer , trick R 11 ity A inistra or Loreen Edin, Liaison to Utilities & Franchise Committee prc1212 13125 SW Hail Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 an & Son$ Cee:ffeefiee Ise. 5914 N.E.42nd Portland,Oregon 97218 284-8533 y L`_`'. November 29, 1990 C';-y OF TV'A%1) Mr. Pat Reilly, City Administrator City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Re: City of Tigard Solid Waste Management It has come to our attention that a proposal has been submitted to the City of Tigard regarding operations of scrappers in your city. It is our understanding that such a proposal would literally put scrappers out of business. We are presently receiving good service from scrappers who operate in Tigard and related areas. Their service is dependable and reasonable and we strongly oppose a change that apparently is needless and would be costly. May we urge your earnest consideration on behalf of small businesses, such as the scrappers and builders. Scrappers are performing satisfactorily and responsibly, and should be supported in this instance. Sincerely, VIt':T , C. � - Nick Vidan, President NV:r �74 W. _ _ / V*1dQ0 ons c.Nm.eH.� Iwe. 5914 N.E.42nd Portland, Oregon 97218 284-8533 November 29, 1990 ::= j" 4i•Y EBF TW-ARD Mayor Gerald Edwards City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Re: City of Tigard Solid Waste Management By copy of letter enclosed, you will note that we have written to your City Administrator, Mr. Pat Reilly, regarding a proposal submitted by waste management companies. As you can see, we are opposed to changing the present operations of scrappers who are performing good service reasonably. It appears that a change would be not only costly but needless as well. May we urge your serious consideration of all aspects of this proposal, particularly as it affects small businesses and subsequent ripple effects. Si ely, VIDA;"N4, �C. Nick Vidan President NVsr encl November 28 1990 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Ms. Jean Gallagher 15885 SW Oak Meadow Lane Tigard, Oregon 97224 Re: Local Hazardous Waste Collection Dear Ms. Gallagher: The Mayor and City Council have created an advisory group, called the Utility and Franchise Committee, who deal with issues regarding solid waste and hazardous waste. On behalf of the Utility & Franchise Committee, thank you for your letter, dated November 3rd, which suggested a Tigard-based household hazardous waste collection emphasis. The Committee considered your suggestion at their meeting on 11/20/90. At that time they requested one of our local haulers research the feasibility of conducting this type of collection locally. A report should be available to the Committee on December 18, 1990. Should you wish to attend on 12/18, the meetings are at the Tigard City Hall at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, and start at 7:00 PM. In case you are unable to attend, I will share with you the Committee findings after that meeting. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me. Sin Loreen R. Edin Administrative Services Manager lre/ms c:'-VCi—lity & Franchise Committee Tom Miller, Miller's Sanitary Service 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Utility & Franchise Committee FROM: Loreen Edin )`� DATE: December 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Agenda Item # 6 - SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE WORKSESSION Please bring your copies of the 11/28/90 draft of the Haulers' proposal which was mailed to you at the end of November. I have also enclosed a hand-written rough draft of information from surrounding jurisdictions regarding their solid waste franchise ordinances. If you would like any other information, please let me know. le/ms C,+ YY ,-F(l q A.1 Y ro i Car M h ` ba-seal -y �eO-Vet-'fio r� 9 3.SS% Ciui l.. /O 'Lys �vrham 44c7o C u ot��a �rs. �25io.ryS �,35 �soo/dwc,. '�OreSt bYOVd .�% Siert SuJtS C.1e-S 410.�ll /o- _lAt�.�..o u)r - V r Kv.owr�... —_. V��S _ _ _ UY,V pow v, V y.w oWy . . Co Pyrdo �✓QaYla le i 1 Ls Iooro ---Free e� SsrJicG *to.to J �l i .Ij I,aoo/do.J. 1� r¢9on— ��t{ --- � - ---- �l%a--- civ. i LLn r� J Class�A'cd h wiSa..c¢ Oy Qw out �&I.00 5OO ;�ffco �J Tu_o:�a 1';r, 310 �r,K.�.�. — cr — e5 � SEZ a �Ir/03 y� ll)¢$TC-57v! l?r._. S_ ken71 - ---/Oyrs Wi ISohv;1)e I 3% �1sam/day 3 yrs. yes t(,3.S0 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Utility & Franchise Committee FROM: Loreen Edin DATE: December 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Timeline - Solid Waste Franchise Ordinance Review Our current franchise ordinance sets some deadlines for annual reports and rate reviews. Council and U&F Committee have expressed interest in hearing the rate structure issues and ordinance rewrite at the same time since they reference each other. For these reasons, the timeframe for ordinance review (which includes rate structure, new rate requests for next year, and the review of the haulers ' annual reports) appears to be the following: o October, 1990 through March, 1991 - Utility & Franchise Committee review Haulers' & City's recommendations for ordinance language and rate structure issues o January, 1991 - Compactor Ordinance to Council for adoption. o February - March, 1991 - Joint meeting - U&F Committee & Council o March 1, 1991 - Haulers file annual report o 1990 annual report actual figures & split out recycling costs & revenue between commercial & residential. o 1990 customer base & service request statistics applied to haulers' recently proposed rate structure o Haulers identify new rate requests, if any (i.e. disposal fee pass-through) o March, 1991 o Finance Director review entire annual report o U&F Committee review rate structure & other new rate requests from haulers o April 1, 1991 - City Administrator submits report to Council o Highlighting Haulers' annual reports o Recommendation on proposed rate adjustments, if any o April - May, 1991 - Council acts upon ordinance, rate structure, and any newly proposed rates. Newly proposed rates must be decided no later than 5/31/91 according to the current ordinance. Due to the complexity of the issues facing the Committee, you may want to consider meetings twice a month during January & February. le/ms BUILDING MATERIALS CO. 8185 S W. HUNZIKER ROAD T[GARD, OREGON 97223 620-6142 December 17, 1990 City of Tigard Solid Waste Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Loreen Edin: Knez Building Materials Company, at 8185 SW Hunziker Road, would like to get an approval by the City of Tigard and Metro to have a Transfer Station for drywall materials. This would only apply to commercial drywall accounts. Traffic would not be increased except by a few new accounts trading with us. We would like to better serve our customers by transferring their left over scrap from their small trucks to a large one. Customers bring in two to ten yards of material at a time. These people are now driving to Hillsboro, Salem, Vancouver or private landfills. We think we could decrease their trips to landfills by doing this. We would then haul the scrap to Grabhorn's landfill. In the next two years we are planning to recycle the wallboard scrap into useable product. This has been done on an experimental basis. I am now waiting for results from a few people on the new product. We will eventually be able to recycle all the wallboard scrap, pending the results of the experimental products. Sincerely, Knez Building Materials Co. jJohn S. Knez, C. President JSK:dm • December 5, 1990 Utility & Franchise Committee C/O City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Members: On November 29 1990 we did not receive a regularly scheduled dumpster pick-up. During the course of three people calling to find out when we could expect a pick-up, we were eventually told we would have to wait until Monday the 3rd of December, When I called back to say this was not acceptable, I was ridiculed about not being able to control kids in my school. The treatment that I received on the phone from an office staff person at Pride Disposal was rude and definitely not service oriented. This individual finally said the best they could do was a Saturday pick-up. I communicated that this was not acceptable because of evening functions in our building on the,part of the community and that there were already many bags laying on the ground outside of the dumpster. I called to share my concerns with Loreen Edin, and to see if anything could be done to get a pick-up of our dumpster sooner. Loreen was very helpful and and excellent listener. She managed to get a pick-up of our dumpster later that afternoon. We were grateful and the only thing left to do (on our part) was to see if we could work something out with Mike, the owner, to avoid the problem of not getting service in the future. At the conclusion of my first phone conversation with Mike I felt as though he also wanted to avoid problems in the future and I felt satisfied with working out a compromise. After that conversation, the same office person at Pride took it upon herself to call and complain to one of my supervisors making several accusations about me. These accusations were inaccurate. I believe that making these kinds of inaccurate statements to a persons supervisor with apparent vindictive intent, is both unprofessional and seriously underminds Pride's reputation and public relations in the community. (Especially inaccurate ones) I called back to talk to Mike and was told he was not available. The same office person was again rude and sarcastic to me. I stated that 1 would be making an official complaint, unless an apology would be forthcoming. Again, I was ridiculed. When Mike returned my call, he was, in my opinion, not given accuarate information about what had transpired. When I explained that my conversations with this Pride office staff person, were observed by another adult, he stated that he didn't believe what I was saying. I am very upset with Pride Dospsal Co. I believe they have treated me and my staff unfairly and without common respect, courtesy, and decency. Mike indicated that his office staff member could do anything she wanted to do; even while at work. I find this disturbing to know !!! Pride has been in the past not always very cooperative. We have however, overlooked this because of how nicely they treated my Parent Club by helping with a yard debris recycling program. We have had some excellent drivers and some rude drivers in the past. This last series of events with the treatment we have received is' very disturbing. I expect more of agencies contracted to serve the public. I do ask for resolution to this conflict and have communicated in more detail to Loreen Edin in regards to the specifics. Thank you for your time, and I would be very happy to attend a meeting or a hearing involving the future dealings with this company. Most sincerely, Mr. Gayle A. Collum Principal Charles F: Tigard School Tigard-Tualatin School District 23i c. Loreen Edin City of Tigard 10935 SW Mira Court Tigard,OR 97223 25 November 1990 i q0 Wayne Wayne Lowry Community Development Dent. City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr.Lowr , Y Several weeks ago I spoke with you on the phone voicing some of my concerns about Pride Disposal Company service. Very belatedly I am writing so the Citizen Advisory Board will be aware of these concerns. With the big push for and participation in recycling it seems appropriate that Pride would be aware that some customers have a significantly smaller volume of trash to be picked up. I have talked with them on a number of occasions. It is clear that less than weekly (ie: every other week or twice a month) pick up is not an option. In fact, they said it could not be done. I happen to have no need for weekly pick up and am quite sure a significant number of customers could reduce the frequency of pick ups. When living in Eugene I was an every-other-week- pick up customer of Danebo Waste Disposal . I spoke with an office person at Danebo so I could provide accurate information here. They have a workable plan developed where a customer can have weekly, every,, eek, or monthly pick up. They cited another company that has pick up on the first and third weeks of the month. Obviously fees are adjusted downward for this service. Pride' s curbside recycling is also less than workable. They insist items be left out in "rigid" containers that are left be- hind. For those of us who have worked hard to have our residence look occupied in our absence having empty containers sitting out- side advertises that no one is home. Therefore, I personally transport my recycle items to a center in lieu of curbside pick up. I will appreciate attention of your department and the Citizen Advisory Board to these questions . Further information about Danebo' s plan can be obtained from Dave Walters , Operations Mana - ger at 484-6227 . Thank you for your consideration and I would be happy to pro vide further input if requested. Day phone: 206-690-1829 Sincerely, Home phone: 503-620-3914 )6u,a L.�z__.�.nita Muntz `/ a.V4 "T'-\ rY, Z /a /& -/;.J 40 tt•The ity, ghaulers talking Freeway- connect through a tunnel, provements include collec TIGARD — Local trash haulers would be considered by the City frequency of their garbage pickup. ticipates they will because of an ex- distributor roads to take loc, and city officials have begun talks to Council in either April or May. As it stands now, residents are pected jump this summer in Metro's off the freeway, Cost of Alt revise a city franchise ordinance "The last time there were any charged a minimum of one can per dumping fees at area landfills. A is estimated at$49 million governing garbage service in the major revisions was in 1978. In week, whether they fill a can or not. Also,the city will look at balanc-area. 1986 we updated and made some Because of changes in the makeup ing commercial, industrial and Alterative B separates A new ordinance could mean administrative changes, but those of individual households, Edin said, residential service within haulers' Way and Highway 217 by : changes in the way residents handle mostly'd.,ealt with the way haulers that may not be the fairest way to boundaries. Residential service is Kruse Way travel lanes wit] their trash and how they pay for gar- filed their reports. That doesn't charge for garbage service, more costly for haulers to administer way 217.That design uses 0 bage servirpe. mean we haven't had rate increases, Families usually produce more because it is labor and time inten- ing Highway 217 corridor i Representatives from Schmidt's but most of them are pass-through t bridge to route second P g garbage than a couple or single-per- sive,Edin said. traffic to 217. A second Sanitary Service Inc., Miller's increases from Metro,"she said. son household, and revisions would The effort also will look at the would be added across H Sanitary Service and Pride Disposal Some of the issues the city and allow people to tailor their trash way neighboring cities govern gar- 217 at the intersection of So Co. began meeting with the city's haulers will look at include rate pickup according to the amount they bage service and the quality of ser- Utilities and Franchise Committee structure, rate increases, recycling produce and around their recycling vice provided by individual haulers. 72nd Avenue and Hampton in September to discuss changes in service and the distribution of habits. "The haulers would like to see Collector and distributor ros the current system. haulers'boundaries. "One household may need pickup some uniformity between jurisdic- would be built,but the confi] The city initiated the talks, said Changes in rate structure could service every week,but another may tions because they serve more than takes out a number of businc Loreen Edin, Tigard's administra- mean paying for garbage disposal by only need it, perhaps, every two one city.One of the things we'd like Lake Oswego's Bangy Roo tive services manager, to update its the of Alternative B is an e: g p pound instead of a flat per can weeks, she said. to see is some way to measure ser- $52.8 million. 12-year-old solid waste ordinance. charge.. Also, it could mean resi- Edin said haulers have not asked vice-the job performance of each Any revisions or a new ordinance dents have more flexibility in the for a rate increase, but she an. hauler," The state wants to beg struction as early as 1993 freeway portion of the projec pletion is targeted in 19S Wet ands group grew from loca/ marsh second ' hase collector a. P tributor roads, would probo By CHRIS NORRED of branching across the state and A retired Portland architect, and a number of businessmen stood be completed until the late 1 hiring a paid director. Broome is now married to Althea tolose if the property were 2000,McClure said. Of the Times "There are wetlands all over Pratt-Broome.He works full-time as t protected for wildlife. The project is mostly TUALATIN — A decade ago, Oregon that need protection," says unpaid director of the Conservancy. John Vitas, the owner of Plasti- through the federal In Jack Broome, the unpaid director of The Hedges Creek Marsh, just Fab Co., remembers how the issue Freeway Program. The state Althea Pratt, the genial town his- the Wetlands Conservancy. west of downtown Tualatin,was the divided people. "A number of us come up with about 8 perces torian and activist, dared the city The;organization has about 220 first freshwater wetland in the state who had property in the area got cost. manager to walk across the field be- dues-paying members, mostly in the of Oregon to be protected by law, together to defend ourselves," Vitas. But not everyone liked hind her house without a pair of hip Portland area. Annual dues are $20, Broome says. In that case the says. . ' ,;. design.,boots. y Y A Los Angeles rep, or$30(or a family, Oregon attorney general 'officially Town meetings with 200 pbple, five for Farmers Insurance That field is a marsh, Pratt was Ttie:group's goal is to increase recognized wetlands as state water- and a seng ,of Bated negotiation Lake Oswego mal estate saying—save it. ::,;: a a,i z :,. , ,, . r, membership 10-fold, with members ways. meetings , �g tweeit envIronmen tliough +ao wayy;to go. From those beginnings, the from across Ore on,. Broome said The Hed es Creek Marsh rotes- talists, cit "`officials Band ro ld o pa, Tualatin-based Wetlands Conservan- g g x w,� P Y P PAYS, With more members the Consery tide created a frerime dogs controvgr- Ownerg;,.,f9 wed ,.Fi iy y alb on bt cy has developed into a dynamic en- �" k -., cy hopes to raise money and,him a sy,jn Thalaan: land was agreed on bo darIes for lti Y vironmental organization with goals paid director,Broome says.�,y: zoned for.3nd lopment, :rprotocwod Brno.`Q.; , 1 ;:�. 'a' AA r<� ax s; s:$ +u " 4sc.,, .=7,#4v,.di',,•,s:t`d.k '`r a, e.x e� r :r. -`' A',`:',t+. i 10S play re ,,Ieives a passing grade City eyes nE classroom discussions about the so they know what we're going think it lacks an in-depth portrayal in ,VNA Simes play and the disease. through," said Ashlie Hallaux, a of sexual abstinence and emphasizes hf the Times Students in Barbara Mills junior, condom use among teens. — Students at Tigard English class thought Monday's per- All 26 students in Mills' class Produced by Kaiser Permanente, 71GARD—A new seven-story o • — 1 gave the stageplay formances fell short in two areas— nodded in agreement,when one stu- the play deals with the life of "A" Monday for its in- parent turnout and viewing by junior dent suggested ninth graders and "Eddie," a popular high school Stu- next year to the Lincoln Center corn ima about AIDS. high students. perhaps younger students should see dent and athlete. Performed by a structure in the next few weeks. res through seniors saw "I think they did a good job of the play. . cast of professional actors, the play Lincoln Eight Limited Co., hC shil hifts at the Deb Fennell Portraying student life. I think The play has drawn fire from partner in Trammell Crow Co., i and followed up with parents should be required to see it some parents in the district who Turn to AIDS,Page 2A department fora variance to build i parking structure on four acres own, complex. !hat's ariside Gar�baa haulers strike a deal The site is located between Soui g streets on what is now a parking lot taurant. B T BUCKINGHAM Waste Committee's actions Tuesday night as a victory If approved, The Lincoln Buildir y iVV1�ATOf the Times for the county plan. feet of office space to the complex. ' r. It does in fact deliver our plan intact, he said. duplicate the Lincoln Center Five bui PORTLAND A Metropolitan Service District "I'm real glad that the spirit of cooperation was there The area is already zoned com committee and Washington County officials struck a —and I want to keep it there:' Murphy, the city's community de . compromise Tuesday night in the dispute over agar- The county plan proposes building a new transfer variances are needed to allow the pro bage transfer station plan for the county. station in Wilsonville and expanding an existing one in The proposed building height,at S Forest Grove.Both stations would be privately owned. parking stalls fall outside the current Metro's Solid Waste Committee rescinded an earlier The Devlin resolution calls for Metro to proceed "There is a 45-foot standard bui: res with amended the Washington County plan with technical analysis of the steering committee plan with allowances for u to 75 feet. If it's Kodak,Charlie Kamerman drawn up by a steering committee of local officials. y g "unless p ants it.The Tigard resident collects and then approval by the Metro Council unless the which is the same height as Lincoln I iything made by the giant camera Steering committee members had objected to the technical analysis warrants modification." That means Three board members of Neighbc mpany—advertisingposters, amendments by Metro Council Presiding Officer Metro could alter the plan if analysis shows that the 8 have strong objections to the prc talo si ns,'standu lrls,'and Tanya Collier, charging that they would lead to con- lo gids,* proposal would cost too much. terns. Four board members have e, m course.....See Page 1 C. struction of a single grant garbage transfer station in In the public hearing,Larrance criticized Collier for city. Washington County. siness...Section B opinion.: „,...... 4A spreading misinformation"that the Washington Coun- Blake said the office building v ssifieds....`klbw People.....Section c The Solid Waste Committee adopted a revised ver- ty plan would cause garbage rates to go up. growth in the area. ice top........9A Religion.........3C sion of the resolution Tuesday night which its author, ., Log ........t0A tegals......... 14A We have absolutely no information that one system Murphy said his department was endar........10A Schools........11A: 6A Metro Councilor Richard Devlin of TLaladn, said ,tuarie........15A Sports......... BA would strike"a very delicate balance"between the two is going to cost more than another—public,private or regarding traffic flow and patterns in sides in the dispute. otherwise;'he said. the county concemi— improvemen News and advertising—6840360 Collier,who favors public ownership of the transfer making a decision. Classded advertising—620.7355 "People can be assured now that there is no one-sta- circulation—620-9797 stations, said Larrance should not have interpreted her `The city will probably require tion scenario being proposed by this body, he said, questions about cost-effectiveness as opposition to the ticipation in improvements on Greenl Copyright19901990 Times Pub�h�Co Washington County Commissioner Steve Larrance, county plan.It's not fair to hide the possibility of a rate who heads up the steering committee,viewed the Solid increase from the public,she said. Tucson, Ariz., Recycles Phone Books Tucson Clean&Beautiful Inc.,a Tucson,Ariz,non- profit affiliate of the national Keep America Beautiful program,reached out to local businesses,government officials and residents to put together a successful drive to collect approximately one million phone books. The program expects to collect 500 tons of phone books this year and save 1,650 cubic yards of landfill, 8,500 trees and$6,000 by not dumping the old books at landfills. Instead,books are shipped to Mexico City, where the paper is recycled into packaging and roofing insulation material.Using recycled paper for printing new books also saves about two-and-a-half barrels of oil per ton of phone books because less energy is needed to make paper from recycled rather than virgin fibers.(City &State 11-5-90) November 28, 1990 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON LETTER SENT TO: Miller's Sanitary Service, Inc. Pride's Disposal Schmidt's Sanitary Service, Inc. Re: Rate Correction Notice Dear In followup to the direction given by the Utility & Franchise Committee on November 20th, the following residential disposal rates are to be corrected retroactively to July 1, 1990- 0 On Call Service $4.75 (was listed as $6.90) o Each Additional Can $10.15 (was listed as $11. 15) The Committee has left it up to each hauler who has been charging a higher fee to determine how the customers are advised of this change. Each customer affected by this change will either receive a refund or credit to their account to remedy any overpayment based on this revised rate. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. Sincerely, Loreen R. Edin Administrative Services Manager lre/ms c: Utility & Franchise Committee 13125 SW Hail Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 AC-G -tZ r►Nt S , i,-C)p cc—o' _ ez>i VIA-r-- P O t2 VO,,- 0 9.-D + E. l37 t LA T%-t M Sb 1f"tAA �t'Csd O c- 'Tn4 L S -lz)o F.D tr TIA I t13 6� O4, Tlcn A-fa-Z) 5 C c TN LLD mac—: VAC>v t K3 (�:j o P LAS (--* PA-SS a �o Y ©U �-' O CZ C�© -Di3 tie-�->V4,.16\ VIA(2:7 �� pC)stTIC)tJ . ` ti t • V r ` co(i SHARRON KELLEY o � 606 County Courthouse Multnomah County Commissioner H Portland, Oregon 97204 District 4 �'F $o (503) 248-5213 1854 1991 Legislative Proposal I. Program or Issue Summary A. ORS 164.775, 164.785, 164.805, as well as portions of Chapters 459 and 466 should be amended to remove all preemptive aspects and substitute language that would affirmatively authorize local jurisdictions to adopt civil penalties to reduce illegal dumping (or "illegal disposal") as a local enforcement option. B. The state criminal penalty under these statutes (which would remain a local enforcement option) should be expanded to include a community service alternative, consistent with the sanctions under the new misdemeanor guidelines. C. Dumping of hazardous and medical wastes should remain subject to exclusive statewide criminal penalties. D. The state should amend ORS 818. 300 and 818 . 310 and adopt the mandatory load cover regulations contained in Section 9. 035 of the Lane County Code except to broaden this regulation to also include recyclable materials. The civil penalty should be set with a minimum fine of $100 and a maximum fine of $300. II. Needs Statement or Policy Rationale Illegal disposal is a major problem in the Portland metropolitan area and its adjacent rural land. Fine levels are outdated and are imposed through expensive criminal procedures by public employees with more pressing priorities. A task force with representatives from Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties, Metro, the Port of Portland, the City of Portland, the State of Oregon, and SOLV (Stop Oregon Litter and Vandalism) has met for the last several months and has concluded that this system should be shifted into the civil realm with higher fines, minimum fines, use of a hearings officer, easier burdens of proof, the use of rewards, and no need for counsel and juries at public expense. Specifically, the Task Force concluded that (1) Penalties for illegal disposal of waste (except for hazardous and medical waste) and recyclable materials should be changed to a civil fine with a minimum of $500 and a maximum of $999; (2) The enforcing agency should be entitled to recover its costs for clean up and disposal of the materials; (3) Local jurisdictions -2- should adopt the evidentiary presumption contained in Section 5.800(3) of the Lane County Code to assist enforcement of the new civil penalty; (4) The state should adopt the mandatory load cover regulations contained in Section 9.035 of the Lane County Code except to broaden this regulation to also include recyclable materials and set a civil penalty should be set with a minimum of $100 and a maximum of $300; (5) Local jurisdictions should establish a reward (for non-public employees) for information leading to the imposition and collection of a fine under these new regulations of up to 51 percent of the fine collected by the enforcing agency. Implementation of these recommendations through local ordinances requires some preliminary changes in state law. Several state statutes currently provide penalties for certain activities related to littering and illegal dumping. The court decision in City of Portland v. Lodi, 308 Or 468 (1989) has the effect of restricting the authority of local jurisdictions to exceed the fine limits under these statutes or to set minimum fines. The proposed changes would relieve pressure on the criminal justice system to handle this issue in jurisdictions choosing the civil penalty option while increasing the likelihood that violators would be caught and successfully prosecuted. The implementation of this approach through the use of new statewide penalties was also considered but initial contacts with other jurisdictions indicate a divergence of opinion about levels for minimum and maximum fines. It was concluded that each jurisdiction should have the option of setting its own limit and defining its own approach to enforcement, including the option of coordinating enforcement procedures. 1541L - 57 WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON January 3 , 1991 To: Washington County Franchised Haulers (offering curb ide recycling) From: Bill Martin Recycling Co inator Subject: Metro Monthly Recycling Report Forms Please find enclosed the new data report forms for all franchised haulers operating within the Washington County Wasteshed that offer curbside recycling service. The new annual financial report form that you will be using this year combined with this form will allow the County and cities to establish more accurate costs for service. Please note: 1. This form replaces the County tonnage data report form that was discontinued in favor of Metro's form. 2 . This form replaces the DEQ participation form that you filled out 4 times per year. 3 . This form is due within 30 days of the end of the report month and is to be mailed to Washington County. The January 1991 meeting of the Washington County Haulers Association meeting will provide information on properly filling out the form. Your attendance at that meeting will assure consistent data collection for all haulers. This form does not replace the DEQ wasteshed report for 1990 recycling data that you received recently. The DEQ form still needs to be completed with 1990 tonnage figures and returned to Washington County by January 25, 1991. The County' s Solid Waste Advisory Committee will review the 1991 Wasteshed Report on February 6th for submission to DEQ by the February 15th deadline. If you have any questions, please call me at 648-8722 . i cc. Washington County Cities I i Department d Health & Human Services 155 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 WIC Nutrition Program: (503) 640-3555 TDD: (503) 648-8601 Health Services: (503) 648-8881 Administration & Planning: (503) 693-4402 Environmental Health: (503) 648-8722 MONTHLY RECYCLING RECORDS PLEASE MAIL TO THE WASTESHED REPRESENTATIVES ON A REGULAR MONTHLY BASIS ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFIC SCHEDULE REQUESTED BY THE INDIVIDUAL WASTESHEDS For questions regarding the use of these forms, please contact your Wasteshed Representatives: Clackamas County Dave Phillips 655-8521 East Multnomah Co. Lynda Rotta 669-2405 Portland Bruce Walker 796-7772 Washington County Bill Martin 648-8722 West Linn Ed Druback 656-4211 or Terry Petersen of Metro's Waste Reduction Staff at 221-1646. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in providing this data on recycling collection services! Printed on Recycled Paper MONTHLY RECYCLING RECORD REPORT FOR MONTH BEGINNING _�_� AND ENDING WASTESHED IN WHICH THIS DATA WAS COLLECTED COMPANY NAME SECTION 1 - Quantity of Material Marketed Tonnage of Estimated Total Materials Inventory Tonnage Marketed Ending Beginning Collected Newspaper + OCC + High Grd Paper + Glass + Tin Cans + Aluminum + Ferrous Scrap + Non-Ferrous + Yard Debris + Other Motor Oil gal + ( gal - gal) _ i Comments• Ii 1 This number should be the sum of all marketings within the indicated reporting period. Quantities should come directly from marketing receipts. These same numbers will go in the first column of Section 2 . MONTHLY RECYCLING RECORD SECTION 2 - Quantity of Material Collected For Recycling Estimated Tonnage of Materials Collected If you have actual tonnages, please include these numbers. If not, please provide rough estimates in the form of percentages. Total Tonnage Collected Depots/ (From Resident. Special Multi-,** Materials Section 1) Curbside Events Family Commerc. Newspaper = + + + OCC = + + + High Grd Paper = + + + Glass = + + + Tin Cans = + + + Aluminum = + + + Ferrous Scrap = + + + Non-Ferrous = + + + Yard Debris = + + + Other Motor Oil gal = gal + gal + gal + gal Comments: Although most haulers consider multi-family complexes to be commercial accounts, please separate multi-family collection from the estimates in the commercial column. Multi-family refers to all complexes larger than a 4-plex. MONTHLY RECYCLING RECORD SECTION 3 - Setouts on Single-Family Residential Routes Number of households in service area: Frequency of recycling collection: [ ] weekly [ ] biweekly [ ] monthly Number of setouts for the indicated reporting period: Full-line Newspaper Only (if setout on a day other than the full- line recycling day) 1st day of the month 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th 21st 22nd 23rd 24th 25th 26th 27th 28th 29th 30th 31st Comments• • • f F yi }p A 77 degree said they did ,giant toga ieCts of theg ble„ the mte for `We want a MWAQWri #fi8nInvus te ,;` said $ Krat of e�iid�vaete dkment �f Theadopd incer►tives •A $3 rebate'for non" .r Ciel customers who. in - weda ale such as glass,Aboard or.300* aii3► U n4 of re�#e ineentiyes papers with their trash, aimed at fust lug- This is actually a reduction in the Couuciior Tft I)eJardin said the current rebate. Now, people who i ve,peckage was a practical bring their trash to the St. Johns sodutionto adi®cultproblem. Landfill or Metro South waste trans- £a or Judy Wyers, however, fer station in Oregon>City pay, 1b said the changes actua Py weakened per load, with a rebate for recycl thaage t'a 'inn-I tiv". abler starting at$e per cubic yard "i think wbat,wo have here—11 and going up,to $10;:for 3.&,go c wouldn't say It's goverment doub- Yards, I" k;=but what we_have is But Metro wants to)dur e qd#wttives,"Wyqm said. people from bringing recycle e Other n ezpreseed reser- material to the transfer statioas. vations about the progress as well, but the vote to approve the package Be . 1 gran unaafmAus. .....:...:. Tote state Environmental Quality Commission ordered Metro to search for ways to boost recycling -through iterates.But Metro officials OA rdr vernme ised th tib ce as much as with'' e. Currently %: ha ` lees � w gacb0pe ' into' "in' will:f be a lever ;• •A tthree ft structure for, debrisi Y a i iqA rd debri&N teas yj* tr der ble Jail ` 'ns �,_'11 d"b Yardll`:�,' _ About4 pOx.ercent :jathe yartl be" debris ge�erafed i�the Partlar�d gree still EYrrds up trY the•damp makintJ u i�5 percent ofthe totat trash kzad As mach as g3 ❑ Portland=area residents. b JUI yardtiebrisc4ufd 1 soon will be able t0 C@Cycle ; oerecyeleunderaMelrEztan lawn'n clippings'and leaves > r yt'd Continued from Page One Ftr41ic Nlubtle Burned a% BY JAMES MAYER task over to Metro: otTheo�egoniansfaff The;regional agency's basic programs 21° approach is to balance the amount of yard debris collected with the.mar= When your grass starts.growing again, kets for compost, the finished prod l don't throw it in the trash. Beginning this summer, all Portland ` uct. ed area residents will be able to recycle their "The who approach to recycling.; yard debris;under a-plan proposed by the has'changed in the,last couple of Metropolitan Service District. years, Carson said:You haveto put ;: ' .;;: some effort into the markets.It isn't 1 By July 1 all cities and counties in the magic. WW�tz � Portland area will have to provide a way.to Metro's ,solid.waste"committee 0 � yard recycle lawn clippings, leaves and other hold a liearisig on the plan at r<urgaes 9 5% deQrls I yard debris.And by 1994,weekly;curbside ; Dthe�meta[s collection of yard debris will be required— 5:30 p.m.Wednesday.. * 7 unless the market for compost,can't ban The plan requires local govern , Plastlr« dle the volumes such a system would gen menu to establish a collection prod erate. grain by July 1 Ata minimum,the I Seven years after the state banned back programs must provide for depots or °°�° j yard burning,the other-shoe is- centers where people can bring their fnally fall yard debris fora fee. ing,said Richard Carson,Metro's planning director. Jeanne Roy,chairwoman of Recy 1 s a big hoe,"Carson said. cling Advocates, a group represent The state Department of Environmental mg individuals and recycling coiniamtnam s° Ntaaapoutian Quality required Portland area govern paries, said her,group supports the Glasa.. 8°fa saEu,e®XSsmaE inerts to make yard debris recycling avail Plan' rna Oregonian able; and most communities turned the But Roy said she wants to ask -- ---•-.a_ Metro to,specifically'list municipal its own processing.center Andy. composting as one of the ways to Washington County offers a'system, meet the initial standards. of collection depots and on-calfcurb=< Metro officials.stressed.:that a, s'de,servtce....'' weekly;curbside collection programCarson said all these programs must be�in place by 1994 so long'as meetthe1991ininimumstandards.: markets are available: Yard debris,.makes up vabout The costs of such a system'could 'percent of the`trash from'the Port= be spread broadly through a commu- land region that ends up:in the nity's property-tax system, or paid dump I directly by users. But some exemption to state law The agency will foster the growth; may be required for a user-fee sys- in compost markets'by providing tem.Under the state'srecycling law, technical help to individuals and garbage customers who recycle can firms`,,and by;promoting the use of I not be charged more.than those.who compost products. do not. `" "It'sreal stupid to put yard debris Some communities already,have in the landfill,but it's justas stupid;; yard debris recycling programs. to process it,and then end up quietly' Gladstone,Oregon City Ahd John-"'shipping it,-out the.back-door,to ac, son.City,offer curbside collection to landfffanyway:because�there's no." their;residents. West hfnn operates'.market,"_Carsonsa�d;