MOUNT AIRY
RECYCLING AND SANITATION COMMISSION
REPORT ON PAY-AS-YOU THROW PROGRAMS
Sub-Committee Chairman
Adam C. Linn, Esquire
Sub-Committee Members
Catherine Ditman
Honorable Laurie V. Hager
Gene Lichtman
I. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS
After investigating "pay-as-you-throw" programs, it is the recommendation of the Mount Airy
Recycling and Sanitation Commission:
- That the Town of Mount Airy not implement a "pay-as-you-throw" or other volume
based trash program at the current time.
- That the Town of Mount Airy implement a stronger program to educate town residents of
the benefits and need to recycle. The program should include: (1) increased in-school
recycling programs, (2) increased enforcement of recycling friendly laws and regulations,
(3) information on purchasing less wasteful goods, and (4) implementation of monthly
recycling goals.
- That current and new recycling and waste ordinances be enforced to penalize illegal
dumping by out-of-town residents.
- That the Town of Mount Airy identify a way to determine the amount of yard waste
collected at the Town's compost center.
- That the Town of Mount Airy schedule special pick-up or drop-off recycling days in
Mount Airy (such as January 1999, holiday cardboard pick-up).
II. AUTHORITY
The Town of Mount Airy (hereinafter referred to as the "Town") is a municipality existing under
the laws of the State of Maryland. Under Maryland law, the Town, as a municipality, exists to
protect the health, welfare, and safety of its residents. Thus, the Town is given the policing and
regulation powers to accomplish the said goals.
The Recycling and Sanitation Commission (hereinafter referred to as the "R&S Commission")
was created in 1990 pursuant to Town Ordinance No. 1990-4 and codified in Section 32-1 et
seq.. The R&S Commission is authorized to "investigate and make recommendations to the
council of the town from time to time concerning appropriate means and methods of efficient
collection, removal and disposition of trash and refuse, including particularly programs for
recycling and the education and encouragement of the use of recycling methods and procedures
to the fullest extent possible." Mount Airy Code §32-3(A).
III. SCOPE
The purpose of this study is to determine whether the Town should implement a "pay-as-you-throw" type program within the next 12 months. This study included an extensive Internet
literature search; retrieval and review of written information from: Carroll County Recycling
Office, Frederick County Recycling Office, Maryland Department of the Environment, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and materials from the Maryland Municipal League. In
addition, interviews were conducted with the county recycling coordinators, our refuse hauler,
and state and local officials. Input was also received from other local communities and citizens
of the Town. An examination of Fiscal Year 1998 and Fiscal Year 1999 Sanitation Department
expenditures was conducted.
The recommendations are based upon a "snap shot" of data available at the time the study was
conducted.
IV. BACKGROUND
The Town is located within both Frederick and Carroll Counties. The Town as part of its
governmental responsibility provides trash and recycling removal for its business and household
residents.
With the Maryland law mandating a 20% recycling rate for counties working as a catalyst, the
increase in landfill tipping fees, waste, and continuing damage to the environment, on July 1,
1992, the Town mandated recycling within town limits. See Town Resolutions 1992-1 and 1992-2. Recycling is the process by which materials otherwise destined for disposal are collected,
reprocessed or re-manufactured and reused.
The monetary costs associated with refuse (either trash or recycling) fall into two categories (1)
tipping (disposal) fees and (2) hauling (removal) fees. A tipping or disposal fee is a "fee, usually
dollars per ton, for the unloading or disposal of waste at a landfill, transfer station, recycling
center, or waste-to-energy facility." See "Decision-Makers Guide to Solid Waste Management,"
U.S. EPA, 1989. A hauling or removal fee is the fee, usually per stop, associated with the
transportation of waste from a residence or business to a landfill, transfer station, recycling
center, or waste-to-energy facility. The Town is currently responsible for both tipping and
hauling fees for trash. However, the Town is not responsible for any tipping fees with respect to
recycling, only the costs of hauling. Therefore, recycling costs the town less.
Since July 1, 1992, the residents and businesses of the Town have been required to recycle standard recyclable items. Recyclables are "materials that still have useful physical or chemical properties after serving their original purposes and that can, therefore, be reused or re-manufactured into additional products." Standard recyclable items include:
- •Newspaper
- •Mixed Paper (junk mail/phone books)
- •Glass
- •Tin and Aluminum Cans
- •Plastics (narrow-neck #1 and #2)
- •Cardboard (regular and corrugated cardboard)
In July, 1995, Frederick County took over the curbside recycling for the town residents located in
Frederick County, thereby reducing the hauling costs associated with recycling of the town. All
town businesses as well as town residents located in Carroll County are still provided recycling
removal by the Town.
Recycling rates within the town have fluctuated over the past few years. The is recycling rate is
computed by dividing the weight of recyclables by the weight of recyclables plus weight of items
disposed of at the landfill. Unfortunately, the exact recycling rates for the town since Frederick
County took over Frederick County curbside recycling are impossible to determine as a result of
certain practices of the Frederick County contracted hauler hired to pick up the recycling.
According to Frederick County Officials, the hauler would estimate the amount and kinds of
recycling material generated by the Town residents. During some months, according to
Frederick County Records, the Town was recycling more than 100% (an amount which is not
possible). The Frederick County Recycling Coordinator has agreed to assist the Town, from
time to time, in determining the actual weight of recycling materials pickup within town limits
The following graphs shows the approximate amount of trash sent to the landfills from Mount Airy during fiscal year 1998 (July 1, 1997 through June 30, 1998) and fiscal year 1999 (July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999).
Based upon the best available records from Carroll and Frederick Counties, the recycling rates
for fiscal year 1999 are as follows. (These rates do not include yard waste brought to the Town's
compost center which should be included in any calculation of total waste stream)
Carroll County, Mount Airy
July 1 through November 30, 1998 15.29%
Frederick County, Mount Airy
Based on weight surveys taken 8/11/98 and 8/18/98 20.6%
For fiscal year 1999, the Town has approximately 1900 households and 200 business
Since July 1, 1998, Frederick County has charged the Town $40 per ton tipping fee for trash that
is removed from Mount Airy and deposited in the Frederick County landfill. Effective July 1,
1998, the Town entered into a 5 year agreement with Frederick County to dispose of the Town's
waste with Frederick County at the rate of $40 a ton with 2 option years at the rate of $41 per
ton. This agreement is in effect until June 30, 2005
The 1999 fiscal year sanitation budget is $355,200. The removal of waste from Mount Airy
makes up approximately 22% of the Town's total annual budget. (This does not include the cost
for cleaning up illegal dumping or its results)
Recently, concerns have been expressed regarding the Town's alleged falling recycling rates. In
addition, several citizens have expressed concerns about paying a flat amount for sanitation and
recycling. Currently, the sanitation and recycling fee is not based on trash output per household.
Families that put out 1 or 2 bags of trash per week pay the same as those households and
businesses that put out 5, 6, or more bags per week. It has been expressed to the R&S
Commission that some families who generate small amounts of trash and large families who
recycle, are not happy with paying the same as those who make no effort to reduce trash or
recycle
V. PAY-AS-YOU- THROW
- Definition
Pay-as-you-throw programs (also known as unit pricing, volume-based billing, and variable rate pricing) are programs in which households are charged for waste collection based upon the amount of trash that is generated by the household and disposed of in a landfill. According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter referred to as the "EPA"), this creates a direct economic incentive for individuals to recycle more and to generate less waste. Residents are motivated not only to recycle more, but also to generate less waste
Pay as you throw programs are based on either volume, (in which residents are charged for each bag or can of waste they generate) or weight, (in which residents are billed based upon weight of their trash). The program details can vary widely; however, there are four major groups: (1) bags, (2) stickers, (3) variable can size, and (4) weight based systems
- Benefits
There are three claimed interrelated benefits derived from the implementation of a pay as you throw program: (1) economic, (2) equality, and (3) environmental
The claimed economic benefits are split between residents and the municipality. For the resident, if they reduce and recycle, they save money. It provides residents greater control over their costs. The less trash thrown out, the less they pay for sanitation. For the municipality, the more residents reduce and recycle the less tipping fees the town pays and the less costs the town incurs. In addition, the municipality and haulers could benefit from an average number of bags set out and; thereby, allowing the use of lesser service or "leaner" trash bids
The claimed equality benefit of pay as you throw program is that residents only pay for the waste they throw away. Under the current flat rate, residents who recycle and prevent waste subsidize those residents and businesses that do not. Similar to electricity, gas, and other utilities, residents under the pay as you throw program, pay only for what they use not for their neighbors
The claimed environmental benefits are that fewer natural resources are used and landfill space is saved. According to the EPA, communities with these programs in place have reported reductions in waste amounts ranging from 25 to 35 percent on average and increasing recycling rates. In Aberdeen, Maryland total waste initially decreased 23% and recycling increased 77%. See MRC Voice, Aberdeen's Pay Per Throw Program, by Jim Litke, December, 1993
- Disadvantages
There are 6 identified disadvantages to the pay-as-you-throw programs, namely, (1) increased administrative costs; (2) increased inconvenience; (3) overloading/stuffing of containers; (4) illegal dumping; (5) perception of hidden tax; and (6) perception of loss of provided service
Pay-as-you-throw programs have a higher administrative costs than the current sanitation and recycling system. Regardless of which system of pay-as-you-throw program is used, governmental authority is required to implement the system. (Tags need to be dispersed, bags need to be weighed, bills need to be prepared, etc...)
Related to the increase in administrative costs is an increase in inconvenience. Residents will be forced to pay more attention to the system and adhere to it. (If a tag program, residents will be required to place tags on bags, deal with stolen tags, etc...) (If a can program, residents will be required to obtain the requisite cans, etc...)
With a pay-as-you-throw program, residents will tend to try to force everything into one bag or can in an attempt to minimize trash fees. If the bag, can, or sticker program does not take into account the "over-stuffing" weight, disposal costs might not be recouped and may not increase recycling rates. If tags or bags are damaged, lost or stolen this presents another set of problems
The implementation of a pay-as-you-throw program will increase the potential for illegal dumping. Increased illegal dumping in private dumpsters, illegal dumping in town limits, and potential of illegally mixing "illegal" waste with "legal" waste of a resident (especially in areas where multiple residents place waste at curbside such as town homes)
Another potential disadvantage of a pay-as-you-throw program is the perception by residents that a "sticker fee" is a new "tax." This would be true if the town fails to reduce taxes in some way to compensate for the new sticker/can fee
Related to the perception of a new tax is that residents of the Town will lose government services of sanitation and recycling. Sanitation and recycling services for residents and businesses are a recognized governmental function of the Town. The perception is that the residents and businesses will not receive the same sanitation and recycling services as they are currently receiving or will pay more for the same services.
- Pay-as-You- Throw Programs
According to the EPA, there are nearly 3,500 communities in the United States utilizing pay-as-you-throw programs. The two communities in Maryland that have participated in a pay-as-you-throw program are: Aberdeen and Chevy Chase (Chevy Chase terminated the program after only 13 months).
Aberdeen, Maryland is considered to be an outstanding model for a pay-as-you-throw program. In March, 1993, Aberdeen began its pay-as-you-throw program. Aberdeen implemented a sticker program for its approximately 3600 households. The program requires that each container of trash be affixed with the appropriate pre-paid sticker to cover the individual tipping fee associated with each residents bag or can of trash. Stickers were designated at 40 cents for a 20 gal can and 80 cents for a 32 gal can. After the first 12 months of the program and an increase in resident education, curbside and drop-off recycling site, Aberdeen showed a 33% overall waste reduction.
VI. CONCLUSION: PAY-AS-YOU-THROW NOT AN APPROPRIATE OPTION FOR MOUNT AIRY AT THE PRESENT TIME
After a review of the advantages and disadvantages of a pay-as-you-throw program, the Town's
current waste output, and the public perception, a pay-as-you-throw program is not considered by
the R&S Commission to be the most appropriate option for the Town at the current time
The goals of the Town with respect to waste removal and recycling are (1) decrease the amount
of waste sent to the landfills, (2) increase the amount of recycling in the Town, (3) decrease the
amount/possibility of illegal dumping, and (4) provide economical waste removal for Town
citizens and businesses.
In April 1998, the Town began to strictly enforce the "no opaque bag policy" in order to increase
recycling by reducing the possibility of hidden recyclables in trash bags. In July 1998, the Town
hired a new waste hauler, who assisted in enforcing the "no opaque bag policy." In addition, the
R&S Commission installed, with the assistance of local businesses, "Town Approved" signs on
store shelves for acceptable trash bags. As a result of these actions, for the first 5 months of
fiscal year 1999, the Town's overall waste has been reduced by 28.9% over this same time period
for last year.
During the summer of 1998, as a result of a full nine member commission (actually 9 members
and 1 student member) for the first time in years, the R&S Commission began to increase its
recycling education programs as well as obtain assistance from the local media in covering the
recycling efforts to increase community awareness.
Since an improvement in the reduction of waste has been realized through enforcement and
education efforts, it does not seem appropriate at this time to also implement a new program. A
new program would add to an already confusing situation that education efforts are attempting to
address and add workload to residents, businesses and Town staff which can be perceived as
"penalizing" them after they have already contributed to waste reduction.
In addition, the R&S Commission's best calculations indicate that there would only be very
nominal savings to the Town's best recyclers/waste reducers. Taking hauling costs as a constant
figure and tipping fees as the variable, the best annual savings any household could hope to
achieve is $20. This estimated savings does not seem to warrant the implementation of such a
labor-intensive program. It is not known whether the savings would outweigh the costs
associated with the possibility of increased illegal dumping.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY
Recycling education and implementation should be considered a process and not a task, and therefore, must be an ongoing program. As demonstrated in other communities, when the communication ends, the recycling rates decreases. It is recommended that the R&S Commission continue education efforts and evaluation of waste stream and recycling rates to "fine tune" the recycling program as circumstances change.