City increases payment to Recycle Ann Arbor while delaying RecycleBank contract decision
The Ann Arbor City Council voted unanimously Thursday night to voluntarily boost payments to nonprofit Recycle Ann Arbor by about $107,000 annually — partly making up for the fact that projections for single-stream recycling have proven overly optimistic.
But council members postponed making a decision on whether to offset that cost by pulling the plug on a program that rewards residents for recycling.
The city's contract with New York-based RecycleBank, which has been debated in recent weeks, is costing the city about $150,000 a year right now. Several council members say they don't think the program has been effective since it launched last September.
A resolution brought forward Thursday night by four council members — Sabra Briere, Stephen Kunselman, Carsten Hohnke and Marcia Higgins — sought to terminate the city's contract with RecycleBank and to use the savings to increase payments to Recycle Ann Arbor, the nonprofit organization responsible for curbside collection of recycling carts in the city.
But after a lengthy debate, council members decided to postpone making a decision on the termination of the RecycleBank contract until their second meeting in September.
"I want you to think about whether this program is meeting its goals and whether it's meeting the needs of our community," Briere told fellow council members.
Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, conducted an online survey that found respondents weren't interested in the RecycleBank rewards program.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
Briere, D-1st Ward, conducted an online survey over the past week that garnered responses from more than 600 residents. Of those who said they've signed up for RecycleBank, 80 percent responded that participation in the program hasn't enticed them to recycle more, while 69 percent said they haven't bothered to request or use rewards coupons.
"A lot of people are simply not interested in recycle rewards," Briere concluded, making a case for ending the RecycleBank program at Thursday's meeting.
Atul Nanda, general manager and vice president of operations for RecycleBank’s Midwest region, stood before council and made a case for the rewards program. But his arguments didn't seem to sway council members who were strongly critical of the program.
Council Member Stephen Rapundalo, D-2nd Ward, said he considered the rewards being offered "fairly minimal." He also said he found it "rather telling" that Nanda acknowledged the average homeowner in Ann Arbor saved only $8 from coupons through RecycleBank.
Higgins, D-4th Ward, said she has been "extremely disappointed" in the rewards being offered through the RecycleBank program.
Higgins noted the program is not designed to reward individual recycling behavior. Rather, residents earn points by putting their carts out at the curb, regardless of what's in the carts, and the points are based on the total weight of materials collected along entire routes.
Council Members Margie Teall, Sandi Smith and Tony Derezinski said they weren't ready to give up on the program just yet, indicating it could be a close vote on whether the contract is terminated. Eight votes are needed to break the contract.
The RecycleBank program wasn't on the chopping block until council members were presented with information last month that showed the city's new single-stream recycling system wasn't working out quite as planned. While recycling had increased 20 percent since last July, the total tonnages collected were still 40 percent below expectations.
A consultant had projected the city would collect 18,425 tons of recyclables for fiscal year 2010-11, but the actual number is closer to 10,800 tons. The number of recycling carts deployed as part of the single-stream program also turned out to be 9.2 percent lower than initial projections that anticipated 32,779 carts being deployed.
City officials said the over-projections and subsequent shortfalls left a $337,527 hole in Recycle Ann Arbor's budget this past year.
The approved adjustments to the contract with Recycle Ann Arbor increase the per-month tipping fee from $3.25 to $3.55 per cart. The same proposal failed to get the six votes it needed to win approval last month, but on reconsideration Thursday night it passed easily.
Hohnke, D-5th Ward, is one of the council members who changed his vote. He said he didn't have enough information before, but it seems clear now that most of the issues affecting Recycle Ann Arbor with regard to single-stream recycling are beyond its control.
Even with the approved boost in payments, Mayor John Hieftje noted the city is still paying Recycle Ann Arbor about $150,000 less than it did before the switch to single-stream recycling.
Hieftje, former chairman of Recycle Ann Arbor, said he saw it as an issue of fairness and he wanted to make whole a homegrown organization that founded recycling in Ann Arbor.
"I think this is a company that deserves our support," he said.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
Basic Bob
Sat, Aug 6, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.
Residents can't be expected to comply with everything that the government tries to force on them. But the consultant (Stead) should at least be responsible for missing the number of carts required. He should buy the 3000 (!) extra carts from the city for the actual cost, plus pay storage on them for the last year. Then he can broker a deal to sell them to some small town that wants to start a single-stream recycle program and pay to have them shipped there.
Robert Stone
Sat, Aug 6, 2011 : 12:04 a.m.
There are only TWO residential-sized recycling bins for 50+ apartments at my apartment complex. I just got this great idea on how to increase recycling around here....
Dog Guy
Sun, Jun 17, 2012 : 1:40 p.m.
How many of your apartment complex recycling bins have been left at Kroger after being stolen to carry deposit containers?
Alan Goldsmith
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 9:04 p.m.
"Hieftje, former chairman of Recycle Ann Arbor, said he saw it as an issue of fairness and he wanted to make whole a homegrown organization that founded recycling in Ann Arbor." Unless of course we're talking about the German Urinal Water Fountain the Mayor was a champion for. Then local wasn't something he supported. Lol. What a hoot.
Alan Goldsmith
Sat, Aug 6, 2011 : 12:24 p.m.
The truth hurts, doesn't it, whoever you are. Lol.
John B.
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 10:27 p.m.
Give it a rest!
Alan Goldsmith
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 9:01 p.m.
Thanks Pat for pointing out the addition details the AnnArbor.com reporter left out. David Stead was the consultant, another one of the Mayor's buddies and that should have been included in the article but wasn't.
Jack
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 8:59 p.m.
As for ease of use, I like single stream recycling. And yes, I do now recycle more, as do others, so it is not a total loss. The numerous rules involved in multi-stream cycling - bundling, tying, packaging, flattening, length limitations, etc., etc. discouraged a lot of recycling. As far as the rewards program, it really has not had a chance to work. One needs quie a few points to redeem for anything worthwhile. I redeemed a Staples one for a small amount only to find it didn't cover anything I needed. I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand, it really isn't necessary, just nice. The single streaming is reward enough. On the other hand, the City seems bent on removing services and charging for them - the latest threat being trash removal - and that makes me want it kept.
SonnyDog09
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:27 p.m.
As I said before, this is crony capitalism at its finest: "My profits are mine. My losses are ours." This sort of corruption is inevitable in a single party worker's paradise.
Kk Ichikawa
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 4:10 p.m.
@Bill....You are SOOO right about the "few examples" of waste and inappropriate spending by the City. I am still waiting to see the results of the $250,000 "Urban Forest Survey" that the City paid a contractor to conduct. This money was transferred from another City Dept to the Forestry Dept because trees divert water from the streets and sewers. The City constantly plays a shell game with the money it collects and nobody knows where the money is except the City. The shell with the money under it can only be turned over and "won" by the City. I would like to see the Urban Forest Survey though?? Perhaps A2.com could FOIA a PDF? It might make for some interesting trivia questions...How many shagbark hickory trees does the City own???
Dog Guy
Sun, Jun 17, 2012 : 1:30 p.m.
"How many shagbark hickory trees does the City own???" There are far too many shagbark hickories according to amorous male squirrels.
glenn thompson
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:15 p.m.
The tree survey is available here: <a href="http://annarbortreeconservancy.org/DaveyTreeReport.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://annarbortreeconservancy.org/DaveyTreeReport.htm</a>
Bill
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:19 p.m.
Another example of poor decisions from the city council. If the average citizen is only saving $8 and the city is spending $150,000 for the program, drop the program and use the money where it can provide more value, like in police and fire protection. Just in the past several days the city council has managed to approve: $107,000 - additional payment to Recycle Ann Arbor (for which some members have questionable ties) $150,000 - out-of-state program to reward recycling by residents which appears to not be too rewarding $150,000 - unnecessary artwork in the new courts building _________ $407,000 - Total of funds that should have been spent on needed services such as fire and police. These are probably just a few of the examples of the waste and inappropriate spending in Ann Arbor.
Carole
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:53 p.m.
The city fathers need to totally get their act together. What a waste of dollars that could go to keep our AAFD and AAPD staffed appropriately, in addition to fixing the many streets that are falling apart. All these cronies patting their back making a mint off the citizens tax dollars is totally disgusting.
a2grateful
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:51 p.m.
1) Pickup is not recycling. What are the actual recycling tonnages of product actually sold, overall and as a percent of pickup? 2) Why not open overall service to competitive bid? Then, we can really analyze Recycle Ann Arbor numbers and service. 3) Limit the service to Ann Arbor residents. 4) Although Recycle Ann Arbor is called nonprofit, its operators receive handsome salaries. There's not much benevolence apparent in this organization. It may have been grass roots way back when. Now, its appears to be a cash generator for the folks at the top, with no incentive to make a profit, and no accountability to citizens. It's the crony version of nonprofit. 5) Pickup tonnages are lower than anticipated? Not much of a surprise, since batteries and motor oil are no longer picked up. Newspapers are no longer being printed, along with their circulars, at anywhere near the former rate. Combine this with the admission that the multi-family portion of the plan was totally bungled, and you see some pretty glaring flaws, especially since roughly half of Ann Arbor is rental based. One again, city hall is wasting a lot of breath on the non issues, and wasting precious tax resources. As they pat each other on the back, and tell each other great job, Recycle Bank says, "KaChing, we get a lot for doing nothing." Recycle a2 says, "We can run it any way we want. Contract? Whatever. They give us whatever we want. No need to worry about overruns. We have no competition, and no reason for competitive efficiency." It's the Crony Mantra: "Let the citizens eat crow."
Patricia Lesko
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:21 p.m.
Ryan, You write, "A consultant had projected the city would collect 18,425 tons of recyclables for fiscal year 2010-11, but the actual number is closer to 10,800 tons. The number of recycling carts deployed as part of the single-stream program also turned out to be 9.2 percent lower than initial projections that anticipated 32,779 carts being deployed." A consultant? No. A consulting company owned by David Stead, who was appointed to the city's Environmental Commission and who, along with Margie Teall (who sits on Environmental Commission) recommended the move to single-stream. David Stead and Michael Garfield (head of the Ecology Center) sit on the Board of Recycle Ann Arbor. Hieftje got a glowing endorsement in 2010 from Michael Garfield shortly after the RAA no bid contract was extended, as did Carsten Hohnke. "A consultant predicted..." is woefully and negligently devoid of important details to help people in Ann Arbor understand just what level of cronyism is involved in the city's no-bid recycling contract with Recycle Ann Arbor, as well as the $600,000 in payments to Stead's company for "helping" Ann Arbor make that transition. If you want to see all the connections between the City Council members, David's Stead's company. the Ecology Center and Recycle Ann Arbor, check them out here: <a href="http://www.a2politico.com/?p=9464" rel='nofollow'>http://www.a2politico.com/?p=9464</a>. Finally, Tom McMurtrie heads the city's recycling program, and Sue McCormick is his boss. If anyone should get it in the neck for this fiasco, it's the city staffers who looked at the crazy predictions and then went before Council to encourage members to vote in favor of spending $8.4 million dollars in taxpayer money on the environmentally regressive single-stream program.
Lets Get Real
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:13 p.m.
If the Mayor is so concerned about "homegrown," tell him to quit outsourcing everythin else: concrete work, waste management, parking. We'll get whole as a city when we stop paying all those dollars to businesses outside of the city/state and begin bolstering the local economy by buying locally, which generates income for locally owned businesses, which generates tax revenues for the city to spend locally. Get it?
Lets Get Real
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:07 p.m.
What the heck is RecycleBank? I've lived in this town for 35 years and never heard of it. From what I read here, it sounds like some entrepreneur's dream. Get local merchants to give discounts - at the expense of the small business owner - give people coupons for recycling (how does that happen anyway - points? how's that determined) and pay the RecycleBank $150,000? Yikes! Give me the $150,000. I'll print coupons for people for a whole lot less.
MyOpinion
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:45 p.m.
The city council must have found an extra bucket filled with money to be able to come up with this extra $107,000 cost. And, no need to terminate the $150,000 Recycle Bank program. There is another bucket of money in a cabinet in the Mayor's office.
HappySenior
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:06 a.m.
"Hieftje, former chairman of Recycle Ann Arbor, said he saw it as an issue of fairness and he wanted to make whole a homegrown organization that founded recycling in Ann Arbor." Excuse me. Fair to whom? The mayor's friends?
Macabre Sunset
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:58 p.m.
Wouldn't it be nice if government reimbursed every business for every mistake it made? Oh, yeah, it only works when you have a personal connection to the mayor. Corrupt government at its finest.
Ed Kimball
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.
No, fair to the people who made a bid based on projections given to them that proved to be inaccurate.
A2comments
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 10:42 a.m.
The Mayor should recluse himself from discussions and votes that involve his former organization...
Macabre Sunset
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 6 p.m.
This is different. The implication is that he is rewarding his friends with the taxpayers' money. It is common for a public official to recuse himself in a case like this. To not do so immediately calls into question his ethical standards.
Ed Kimball
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:37 p.m.
Why? If you were on city council, would you recuse [not recluse] yourself from every decision concerning an organization with which you had once been affiliated? Would you vote only on issues about which you had no experience or background?
thorj97
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 10:41 a.m.
Reduce, reuse, then recycle. Why our our leaders so focused on increasing the volumes of waste (recyclable or otherwise) generated in AA? And why don't we have money for police, fire, or crosswalk safety, but we can find ca$h for private companies when AA doesn't meet or exceed waste generation targets?