HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.c. DCCAB PresentationWN
FROM:
DATE:
• C�City of
osernount
Mayor Hoke
Councilmembers: Napper
Oxborough
Walsh
Wippermann
Stephan Jilk, Administrator/Clerk
April 15, 1988
P.O. BOX 510
2875-1451-H ST. W.
ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068
612 -423-4411
RE: DCCAB Discussion/Presentation
Members of the Dakota County Citizens Against Burning
(DCCAB) will be in attendance at our meeting to make a
presentation to you regarding their concerns about the Resource
Recovery Facility, recycling, and composting as methods of
handling this county's waste.
In the Mayor's response to their request to appear before
the council to state their case on this matter the Mayor advised
them that this meeting would be an opportunity for them to
present their position, allow discussion, but it would not be a
time to expect the council to enter into debate on the matter and
that they should not expect the council to take a formal position
one way or another on the resource recovery facility.
The DCCAB group will be pressing the council to take a
position, I'm sure, because that is their purpose on being here.
They want support against the mass burn facility. They will
pursue the avenues of recycling, composting, education and
materials separation as alternatives to the mass burn facility.
They question the need for the mass burn facility and claim
that it will cause more harm to the environment, through the
emission of dioxins, SO2 and other toxic elements, than would
occur through other "more responsible" methods of handling the
county's waste. Most of the questions raised by them in this
area of discussion have been responded to by the county staff and
their consultants.
I don't believe we are capable of responding with any
greater level of "expertise" and should not try. That is not to
say the answers supplied by the county are totally accurate, but
I don't feel we are any better prepared to respond to them. (You
have a copy of the questions with the county's responses.)
Their drive will be to pursue major recycling, composting
and materials recovery programs which will eliminate the need for
such facilities as is proposed for Rosemount -Dakota county and, I
believe, they will attempt to discredit the visible efforts of
the County and/or city of Rosemount to work towards those ends.
Council Memo
April 15, 1988
Page 2
Again, in an effort to assist you in discussing some of
these issues I would ask you to consider:
1) The project, although located in Rosemount, is a Dakota
County project. Any serious effort to stop the
facility from being built and operated should center in
on Dakota County. Getting the city of Rosemount to be
against it may move it out of Rosemount but into
someone else's back yard.
2) The county is beginning extensive programs to develop
recycling, composting, education of the public in this
entire process and to gain input from the public on
recycling.
You have additional information, prepared by Dakota
County, pertaining to the recycling, composting,
education effort being staged by them and what is
expected to come from that effort in response to
concerns about alternatives to just "burning our
garbage'.
3) What is the city of Rosemount doing in this effort and
furthermore what are they doing about the mass burn
facility?
Since the County began discussion on alternatives to
landfills, the city has been involved in the education on
alternatives. It has, through its staff and elected officials,
snt time, effort and dollars to a) tour facilities in Europe;
I attend resource recovery seminars in Oregon; c) prepare and
request proposals for conducting recycling programs in Rosemount;
d) commit staff to staying abreast of the Resource Recovery
project by attending county meetings, county/consultant meetings,
touring facilities in Olmstead County, forming an Ad Hoc
Committee to deal solely with the project, to send staff to an
upcoming national conference on the handling of ash; and e) have
worked with county staff to develop a recycling pilot project in
the city to assist in determining the best approach to a full
recycling program for the city and, possible, throughout Dakota
County.
The city has not sat back with a carefree/careless attitude.
It has been concerned and active in this area of resource
recovery and will continue to be, so that the best approach to
handling our waste and the best interest of the city are
addressed.
ij