Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Recycling Stormwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City highlights curbside recycling gains, explores more e‑waste options and weighs storm‑water utility
Summary
Public Works outlined large increases in curbside recycling since universal carts were deployed and proposed options for more frequent e‑waste collection; staff also presented a preliminary analysis of a possible storm‑water utility and the legal and financial issues to study further.
Public Works Director Mike Moore reported a dramatic increase in curbside recycling volume after the May contract started and the distribution of about 40,000 blue carts. Moore said annual spring collection events still gather large electronics — this year about 36 tons at the DPW event — but residents often set items at the curb or in blue carts between events and such items can be routed to refuse rather than recycling.
Moore outlined near‑term options to handle more e‑waste: additional annual or semiannual collection events, a drop‑box program at city sites for smaller electronics, worked drop‑off partnerships with vendors, and public education about where to recycle batteries and other items (several large retailers accept rechargeable batteries and other e‑waste). He told council staff will report back this spring with a recommended mix of options.
Staff then presented the pros and cons of a storm‑water utility to fund stormwater maintenance and capital needs. City Engineer Brent Bayshaw described the city’s drained network (approx. 660 miles of underground storm main, 28,000 catch basins and 44 retention ponds) and the state‑mandated new design standards for developments over one acre. Finance Director Jennifer Varney said many cities fund stormwater with a separate dedicated fund and user fee assessed by impervious area; she estimated a comprehensive study to scope and charge a utility would require an external consultant and public outreach and put a preliminary planning timeline at roughly 6–12 months. City Attorney Mark Kashewski reviewed cases and legal questions, noting the Michigan Supreme Court’s Bolt v. City of Lansing decision and that recent draft legislation (Senate Bill 660) would create a statewide framework; Kashewski said about a dozen Michigan municipalities have adopted utilities to date.
Council discussion focused on fairness, likely costs, and whether to budget a consultant study. Staff recommended budgeting for a study to produce a defensible fee structure and credit program; councilors asked staff to include a study cost in the upcoming capital/budget planning so the city can evaluate the utility in 2025–26 before any fee is adopted.
Ending: Moore and Varney said staff will return with options and cost estimates for e‑waste improvements and with a scope and budget estimate for a storm‑water utility feasibility study if council agrees to proceed.
