Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Refuse And Recycling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves refuse‑rate increases; council declines city curbside recycling after cost review
Summary
City staff presented a refuse study and a package of rate changes to shore up the refuse enterprise fund; council authorized staff to draft an ordinance to implement the increases and declined a costly city‑run curbside recycling program.
The Cedar Falls Committee of the Whole voted April 21 to direct staff to draft a refuse‑rate ordinance that implements a series of proposed fee increases and adjustments aimed at keeping the refuse enterprise fund solvent and preserving minimum cash reserves.
Presenters Brian Heath (refuse/transfer operations) and Controller/Treasurer Lisa Eroding summarized current operations at the jointly owned Black Hawk County Landfill (about 215,000 tons annually; roughly 25 years of permitted space remaining) and the city's transfer station, recycling facilities and compost operations. Eroding said the refuse fund has been self‑supporting but, without rate increases, is forecast to run a deficit by fiscal year 2031.
Staff proposed a package of changes: a $2 across‑the‑board increase to residential refuse container fees plus a 3% increase effective July 2025 and continuing 3% annually for several years; raise the minimum transfer‑station charge for loads under about 215 pounds to $7; increase single‑bag drop‑off from $0.75 to $1; raise TV/CRT (old‑style monitor) recycling fees to $10 each; and adjust tire disposal fees to align with the contractor (Liberty Tire) charges. The proposal also equalizes the University of Northern Iowa drop‑off rate to the city transfer‑station rate ($65 per ton) and preserves compost and yard‑waste services that divert material from landfill.
Staff evaluated a city‑run curbside recycling option and concluded the program would be expensive. Their scenario—based on 60% participation (about 7,500 households)—estimated a capital cost of roughly $560,000 for two automated trucks plus about $480,000 for recycling carts and a first‑year operating cost near $356,000 (including staffing). With existing private options and strong use of city drop‑off sites, staff recommended continuing the current mix of city drop‑offs plus privately operated curbside recycling rather than starting a city system.
Refuse staff highlighted successful local programs: the city operates a compost site (contracted operation) that processed yard waste diverted from landfill, provides leaf‑vacuum service by appointment ($50 fee) and runs multiple public recycling drop‑off sites. Staff said the compost product is used on city projects and made available to the public.
Councilors commended staff for operations and the recent transfer‑station tour. After brief discussion and questions about compost testing and logistics, members voted to have staff draft the proposed refuse‑rate ordinance. The motion to draft and return an ordinance carried.
Controller Eroding said the fund goal is to maintain a minimum cash reserve (roughly $500,000 or 20–30% of annual expenses) and to fund a future capital project in the CIP: land acquisition for a new transfer station (CIP request ~$1,000,000). Staff said the proposed rate changes are intended to maintain cash flow for refuse services, sustain diversion programs and limit the risk of deeper shortfalls later in the decade.
