Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts South Metro waste‑diversion plan after removing single‑hauler item
Summary
Council approved the South Metro waste‑diversion plan 4–3 after amending it to remove a recommendation to explore single‑hauler trash service; the plan remains as a regional framework and individual measures will return to council for implementation decisions.
The Englewood City Council on Sept. 2 adopted the South Metro waste‑diversion plan after a late amendment to remove a single‑hauler recommendation. The final vote was 4–3.
Sustainability Program Manager Mel England told council the plan is regional guidance developed with other South Metro jurisdictions and that adoption does not itself implement any recommendations; each proposed action would return to council for separate consideration and any funding or ordinance change would need council approval.
Council debate and amendment: member concerns surfaced over specific recommendations. Mayor Pro Tem Anderson moved to remove single‑hauler collection from the adopted plan; that motion passed. The council then considered and rejected a separate motion to remove a construction‑and‑demolition (C&D) ordinance feasibility recommendation. After debate the full amended plan was approved by a 4–3 vote (ayes: Anderson, Noonkamp, Prang, Sierra; nays: Russell, Prang? [note: transcript lists nays as Russell, Prang, Wright earlier]; final recorded nays were Russell, Prang and Wright).
Why it matters: the South Metro plan outlines regional strategies—education, organic diversion, infrastructure support and possible C&D regulations—intended to reduce commercial and municipal waste volumes and support state goals. Staff and the consultant framed the document as a menu of options; England said specific measures (for example, a feasibility study for a C&D ordinance or pilots for commercial organic collection) would require separate research, funding and council approvals.
Council directions and next steps: staff said it will pursue grant and technical‑assistance opportunities, coordinate regional funding applications, and return to council with feasibility studies and targeted proposals for any actions the council wants to pursue. Councilmembers asked staff to identify which menu items should be prioritized for research and to bring back estimated costs and timelines before any ordinance or program decision.
Ending: the plan now serves as a regional roadmap for further exploration; removal of single‑hauler recommendation means staff will not prioritize that option for near‑term study unless council later directs otherwise.
