CAPE MAY CITY – The City Council has put off a vote on an ordinance that limits the amount of curbside recycling materials that businesses and residents can put out after the measure drew criticism at a public hearing.
In September, city Public Works Director Eric Prusinski and his boss, City Manager Paul Dietrich, appealed to the council for limits. Prusinski recounted circumstances where city trucks had to make multiple trips in a week to keep up with the amount of recycling material lining the streets. Prusinski said excess beyond any limit the city sets should become the responsibility of the business to dispose of.
Dietrich said at the September meeting that the point of the change was to “find the line where the city’s obligations end and a commercial business needs to arrange for its own pickup.”
The city responded by introducing an ordinance that limits property owners of all types, residential and commercial, to the equivalent of two 96-gallon receptacles for city collection once per week. Materials for recycling in excess of that limit would be the responsibility of the property owner, who would have to arrange for private collection.
The ordinance came up for a public hearing and a potential vote to adopt at the council meeting Nov. 18. Following the hearing, the council tabled the measure to the Dec. 3 council meeting.
At the hearing, some business owners took issue with the ordinance limitations. They cited the city taxes they pay, with one claiming recycling pickup was among the very few city services commercial establishments use. The owner of Uncle Bill’s Pancake House called the ordinance change “unfair.”
A representative of a condo association also criticized the ordinance, citing not just the taxes paid for services like recycling but also the need to avoid adding more trucks to city streets through individual arrangements with outside pickup companies.
But Jules Rauch, speaking for the Taxpayers Association, said the ordinance went too far in the direction of taxpayer-supported services for commercial establishments. He said the city finds itself in a “recycling collection business” it should not be in.
Rauch argued that commercial customers should get no greater pickup service than residents. He suggested changing the ordinance to one 96-gallon container per establishment, with all recycling above that level being a “cost of doing business” borne by the establishment.
Dennis Crowley, chair of an advisory committee on taxation and revenue issues, called the issue complex and the city’s proposed ordinance only a bandage. He urged the council to delay and have his committee do a comprehensive look at the issue.
Mayor Zack Mullock, himself a business owner in the city, said he was sympathetic to the concerns of the commercial establishments. But he pointed out that the city is currently in violation of its own code.
“We operate today on the basis of an ordinance that says the city will not pick up any recyclables at commercial businesses. But we do,” he said.
Discussion among council members showed that no one was happy with the current state of recycling. There were concerns on the council about businesses that “take advantage” of the city pickup program, leaving as many as 30 individual containers along with stacks of cardboard, creating unsightly displays and safety problems relating to clear passage for pedestrians. The discussion also focused on the welfare of Public Works employees who are dealing with excessive amounts of material.
Council member Shaine Meier asked for a two-week tabling of the ordinance to give the city more time to consult with the business community in order to find a “middle ground.”
Dietrich said he doubted a middle ground would be found. “This is an issue of volume control, and the city has to decide how it wants to approach it,” he said.
Recycling globally changed after China stopped being the primary customer for recycling material in 2018. Prices for recycling services rose rapidly once the costs were not offset by revenue from the purchase of the material by China and other Asian countries.
Towns across the county came up with strategies to cope with that change, and agreements with the county Municipal Utilities Authority became year-to-year arrangements allowing the MUA to have a more flexible response to changing circumstances.
Throughout it all the state law mandating recycling remained in effect.
In Cape May the decision was to take the process in-house. Equipment was purchased, and a new process was implemented. That process morphed into the current situation in which the city stands in violation of its own code.
The tabling of the ordinance pushes the potential vote to adopt it to the Dec. 3 council meeting in City Hall at 5 p.m. Any substantial change to the ordinance would require that it be reintroduced, starting the process over again.
Contact the reporter, Vince Conti, at vconti@cmcherald.com.
