Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Recycling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arvada council endorses stepwise plan for EPR credits, modest fee change and a composting pilot
Summary
City staff outlined rate updates, billing improvements and four composting options. Council directed staff to pass through required Republic contract increases, raise the city program fee by $0.05, keep the enterprise fee at $1.06 and pursue a near‑term drop‑off composting pilot while negotiating EPR credits and future curbside options.
The Arvada City Council spent the bulk of its April 28 workshop on solid waste, recycling and composting, directing staff to pursue a measured, stepwise rollout that preserves community trust while preparing for expanded organics collection.
Staff presented three near‑term rate decisions and a set of composting options. Chris Gray said Republic Services’ contract and state pass‑throughs must be passed along and asked council whether to raise the city program fee by $0.05 (from $1.69 to $1.74 per month), to keep the enterprise fee at $1.06 per customer per month, and how to proceed on composting. Under the proposed fee schedule a 95‑gallon customer would see a monthly bill move from $22.45 to $23.25, staff said.
On extended producer responsibility (EPR), staff reported the city’s application was submitted before the April 13 deadline and is under negotiation with the program administrator (referred to in the presentation as CAA). Staff described a required billing change to display a recycling reimbursement line item and said negotiations over billing cadence were ongoing.
Republic Services’ municipal relations manager Steve Gilmore told the council current EPR estimates indicate reimbursements could fully cover curbside organics costs for participating households. "Literally the EPR reimbursement would pay for a curbside organics program — it would be a wash on the bill," Gilmore said. Staff and Republic showed examples from peer cities (including Superior) where three‑bin programs substantially raised diversion rates.
On composting, staff outlined four options: (1) subscription/opt‑in curbside (estimated ~$15.20 per month and requiring an estimated 3,000 minimum sign‑ups to be viable), (2) citywide opt‑out curbside (estimated ~$5.07 per month per participating household because costs are shared across all cart customers), (3) a near‑term, staff‑recommended interim drop‑off pilot managed by a vendor like Scraps, and (4) no city action (rely on private vendors). Staff recommended Option 3 to buy time for billing, outreach and logistics while preserving the ability to pursue Option 2 soon after if reimbursements and operations align.
Councilmembers broadly agreed to staff recommendations 1–3 (pass through Republic increases; raise city program fee by $0.05; maintain enterprise fee at $1.06) and expressed support for a stepwise approach on composting that starts with a near‑term pilot drop‑off. Several members urged robust customer communications so residents see any recycling credit applied and understand the timing of any new service. Staff gave a target timeline: finish negotiations with the EPR administrator and Republic in the spring; return to council for a contract amendment and an adoption request (target June 16) with rates effective July 1 if approved; longer‑term contract procurement and implementation were framed around a July 1, 2028 new solid‑waste contract date.
Next steps: staff will continue EPR negotiations, pursue the billing updates needed to display reimbursements and charges clearly, stand up a drop‑off pilot (vendor agreements and site selection to follow), and return to council at checkpoints as the master services agreement and contract amendments are finalized.
