Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Waste Diversion topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Englewood commission reviews regional waste-diversion plan; seeks more contractor detail before letter to council

5339754 · July 9, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Sustainability Commission discussed a South Metro waste characterization and diversion plan prepared for Englewood and three neighboring cities, asked for more data from the consultant, and agreed to form a short subcommittee to draft any formal letter to City Council ahead of a July study session.

The Englewood City Sustainability Commission on July 1 reviewed a regional waste characterization and diversion plan conducted for Englewood, Littleton, Sheridan and Centennial and discussed next steps including a possible commission letter to City Council.

Mel England, the city’s sustainability staff liaison, told the commission the contractor had done a “deep dive” into local waste streams, including landfill sorting and stakeholder engagement, and produced regional recommendations intended as a nonbinding blueprint for future action. England said a presentation will go to City Council at a study session on July 28 and that the commission’s letter of support, if any, would be due in staff packets by July 20.

The plan’s top regional recommendations include creating a South Metro recycling drop-off center, supporting large-scale organics processing, and improving multifamily and commercial access to recycling and composting. England said the consultant highlighted the region’s gaps: roughly 80% of the Front Range has convenient recycling drop-offs, while South Metro does not.

Commissioners pressed for more detail on how the consultant prioritized recommendations. “Why does 5.1 have a shorter turnaround than 5.2?” one commissioner asked; England said she would get the consultant’s explanation. Commissioners also asked for the consultant’s tonnage estimates and feasibility assumptions behind the plan’s icons for diversion impact.

The commission heard staff explain funding and policy opportunities tied to the plan. England said the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) is distributing federal funding through jurisdictional subawards; jurisdictions may apply on a rolling basis through Oct. 31. Englewood’s maximum jurisdictional subaward from that program was cited as $600,000. England also described a parallel state/EPA grant stream that can fund building, transportation or waste projects, and cautioned applicants may not seek funding from both programs for the same project.

Panel members discussed Colorado’s new Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) law, which staff said will provide free residential recycling starting in 2026 and is expected to apply to businesses later (staff cited 2028 as a likely business timeline). Commissioners noted EPR’s schedule affects the relative feasibility of some recommendations: it will make residential recycling expansion more straightforward than some business-targeted measures, at least in the near term.

Commissioners also asked for local operational details: staff said Englewood currently has six licensed haulers (named on the city website as Northwest Cascade, Republic, Summit Environmental Group, Spielman Enterprises, Waste Connections and Waste Management), which complicates rollouts that depend on a single-hauler system. Staff described several policy options discussed in the plan, including an “equal space” ordinance for multifamily/commercial properties, construction-and-demolition recycling requirements, and coordinated education efforts such as resident “champion” trainings.

Rather than immediately drafting a final letter to City Council, the commission agreed to form a short subcommittee to refine talking points and submit a letter of support or recommended edits. Staff said they would send a doodle poll to schedule that subcommittee meeting and would collect follow-up answers from the consultant to commissioners’ technical questions. England said the study’s recommendations are nonbinding and that each proposed policy would need individual council action before implementation.

Commissioners also flagged equity and business-impact concerns, urging staff to identify who would bear implementation costs and how lower-income residents and local businesses would be affected. The commission asked staff to compile those clarifications and the consultant’s technical notes before finalizing any formal recommendation to council.

The commission will revisit the plan at a special subcommittee meeting before the July 28 study session; staff will forward consultant responses, timelines for grants and the draft letter to commission members in advance.