The report itself is only 41 pages.
But to fully understand cost and revenue, cooperative structures, applicable technology, or implementation of a solid waste authority, Resource Recycling Services prepared seven appendices to accompany the document.
All totaled, the Capital and Cooperative Initiatives Revolving Fund (CCIRF) study report is nearly 500 pages.
Interested residents will have an opportunity Aug. 27 to hear the condensed version and ask questions as Independence and Springfield townships present a joint forum at Clarkston Junior High School, 6-8 p.m.
Clarkston residents may want to attend as well.
‘Both Ortonville and Clarkston are located in two of the CCIRF townships,? the report reads. ‘Since both have subscription based services, and if the surrounding townships proceed as an authority, it would be recommended that these communities participate.?
Clarkston City Manager Dennis Ritter said he wondered when someone would ask how the half-square mile city fit into the scheme of things.
‘We weren’t asked to participate in the study,? he said. ‘But we’ll certainly be impacted if one company is selected to service all the surrounding areas. All the small independents will close up and our residents will have no choice but to use the same company the others are using.?
Ritter, who formerly served as Waterford Township supervisor, said advocates of a single-hauler system tried to push a similar issue through the board about 10 years ago.
‘The residents were up in arms,? he said, noting opposition caused the plan to fizzle quickly. ‘They wanted no part of it.?
But the current study and accompanying recommendations are different from those presented in Waterford a decade ago.
Boiled down, RRS recommendations look like this:
‘CCIRF communities should begin to finalize details of a solid waste authority, which would have authorization to seek services on behalf of founding communities.
In other words, representatives of founding communities’Independence, Springfield, Brandon, Groveland, White Lake, West Bloomfield and Waterford’would, after receiving approval from individual township boards, collaborate to create a new entity: a solid waste authority.
Once created, the entity would make waste hauling decisions for residents in every participating community.
‘By working together, the communities would be able to get good pricing on any sort of purchasing for trash, recycling and composting services,? said Anna Collinson, RRS project manager. ‘By forming the authority they would be able to pursue some sort of community-wide contract for solid waste and recycling services.?
But a closer look at the study reveals that a number of important details are crucial to the functionality of such an authority.
According to information disclosed in Appendix A of the study, at least two units of government are required to create an authority.
A key issue for discussion, it reads, are determining which and how many units will participate, and which ones are needed at a minimum for a ‘go? decision on forming the authority.
The makeup of the board of directors is also a critical element.
How many board members should be appointed, by whom, and how long they should serve? What types of individuals should be appointed, and how should board representation be determined?
All, says RRS, are questions participating communities need to answer carefully.
Transition issues can also be a major challenge in setting up an authority, according to the report.
‘Existing programs currently in place may need to be addressed in some capacity as part of the authority’s responsibilities if any new programs are likely to negatively impact those programs,? it reads.
The report also lists strengths and weaknesses of such an entity.
One ‘strength?: ‘The authority can insulate system decision making from the more political and sometimes less predictable legislative process of each individual participating local unit.?
One ‘weakness?: ‘Authorities have sometimes become more independent from local units than they would like, with the chain of accountability broken between the members and the authority. Sometimes this political distancing can make decision making more difficult when an issue in fact is highly political.?
Financing the authority gets significant attention in the report, as well.
RRS? second recommendation reads as follows:
‘CCIRF communities should begin work on specifics of a community wide hauling contract and procurement specifications.
In other words, determine what waste hauling services are appropriate for which parts of which communities and put out a request for bids from interested haulers.
‘As part of the process of becoming an authority and going out for bids, there will be a lot of discussion and hashing out of details,? Collinson said. ‘What service levels need to be in place? What types of services??
The third recommendation says:
‘CCIRF communities should request proposals from conversion technologists.
‘That third piece is to continue to get a more a formal ‘request for proposal? processed from the conversion technology people,? Collinson said. ‘We went through an initial review of these types of companies, but the details aren’t firm until you get actual formal pricing. We’re recommending the communities continue to pursue this by going through a formal process to see if still viable.?
The study points to a great number of variables in the viability of implementing such technology to deal with waste locally.
Based on several factors, including the number of households located in the study area, RRS estimated the waste that would be available to a conversion technology company. It also estimated operating costs for such a facility, and the potential revenue related to the sale of recycled materials and the ‘sale of biomass as an energy feedstock.?
‘The values of the recyclable commodities are often cyclical in nature and are highly correlated to the national and global markets for raw materials and overall economic activity,? the report reads.
‘The two heat treatment technologies’had very different assumptions about the market value of the material, assuming the same quantity of marketable material.?
The analysis, it said, illustrates that market volatility in recycled commodity markets can have a major impact on revenue sharing.
Next week: Local haulers and members of the community share positive and negative reactions to the CCIRF study results.