Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Introduction 4.21.261 Chapter 1 Introduction Role and Purpose Local governments are required to develop comprehensive solid waste management plans (SWMP). These plans serve as guiding documents for local governments' solid waste programs, including detailing all existing solid waste handling facilities within a county and long-range estimates for needed future solid waste facilities. These plans must also provide information on waste reduction, reuse, and recycling programs. Jefferson County Public Works (Public Works) is responsible for developing and maintaining the Jefferson County solid waste management plan (SWMP) and delivering solid waste and moderate risk waste services. Requirements for local solid waste planning are found in RCW Chapter 70A.205.040 through 70A.205.075 and RCW Chapter 70A.205.110 and 70A.205.115. Local governments are also required to plan for reducing small-volume hazardous materials and waste, also described as moderate risk waste. These plans are known as local hazardous waste management plans and have separate requirements from local comprehensive solid waste management plans. Requirements for moderate risk waste planning are found in RCW Chapter 70A.300.350 and Chapter 70A.224.020. By the provisions of RCW 70A.300, cities and counties may combine solid waste and moderate risk waste plans as Jefferson County has opted to do. By the provisions of RCW 70A.205.040, cities may “enter into an agreement with a county pursuant to which the city shall participate in preparing a joint city-county plan for solid waste management”, as the City of Port Townsend has opted to do. Relationship to Other Plans This SWMP functions within a framework of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and the State Solid and Hazardous Waste Plan. Plan Development By the provisions of RCW 70A.205.110 (3), “Each county shall establish a local solid waste advisory committee to assist in the development of programs and policies concerning solid waste handling and disposal and to review and comment upon proposed rules, policies, or ordinances prior to their adoption. Such committees shall consist of a minimum of nine members and shall represent a balance of interests including, but not limited to, citizens, public interest groups, business, the waste management industry, agriculture, and local elected public officials.” RCW 70A.205.110 (3) also requires that SWMP’s must be “prepared with the active assistance and participation of a local solid waste advisory committee.” The Jefferson County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) has been an integral part of 2 developing this SWMP. The committee is composed of broad and balanced interests as described in RCW 70A.205.110 (3). SWAC and Public Works discussed a new framework for the SWMP at regular SWAC meetings in 2025. Department of Ecology (Ecology) staff presented an overview of the planning process and plan requirements at a regular SWAC meeting on January 22, 2026. Public Works collaborated with SWAC on the SWMP update at a regular SWAC meeting on April 23, 2026. All SWAC meetings are open to the public, duly noticed in the paper of record (Port Townsend and Jefferson County Leader), and follow Open Public Meetings Act requirements per Resolution No. 50- 22: Appendix A: OPMA Guidelines for Jefferson County Boards, Commissions & Committees, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on October 24, 2022. A table of the public meetings convened for this SWMP update is found in Appendix __. The process of updating and adopting this SWMP consists of the following steps: 1. development and review of draft chapters for comment by the SWAC and County staff 2. compiling revised draft chapters into a complete draft for review and comment by the SWAC and County staff 3. development of a SEPA checklist for the draft SWMP 4. determination of cost and rate impacts using the Cost Assessment Questionnaire provided by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) 5. review of the Preliminary Draft SWMP by the public, Ecology and UTC 6. incorporation of public, UTC and Ecology comments to produce the Final Draft SWMP 7. review of the revised Final Draft SWMP by SWAC and Ecology 8. adoption of the Final Draft by the City of Port Townsend and Jefferson County 9. submittal of the Final SWMP with resolutions of adoption to Ecology for final approval 10. final approval by Ecology Plan Maintenance The update of this plan was delayed until the process for identifying an alternate site for a new transfer station was completed in early 2026 because of the implications to the SWMP. A description of the rationale and planning for a replacement transfer station is found in Chapter 3 – Profit: Economic Performance. This SWMP is a guide for planning and decision making and is intended to be a “working” or “living” document. It must be adaptable to a dynamic regulatory and business environment in order to remain relevant and useful. The Department of Ecology now hosts SWMP’s in a digital format which provides an opportunity to make more frequent updates to this SWMP. For example, the Five-Year Capital Plan found in Appendix __ will be updated annually and other SWMP revisions will be documented in the Plan Update Log found in Appendix __. 3 Previous Solid Waste Management Plans Public Works provides solid waste and moderate risk waste services as an Enterprise Fund. Enterprise Funds are self-supporting services such as utilities that recover costs through user fees, rather than taxes, operating like a private business. User fees must be used to deliver a specific service and must be monitored and adjusted to maintain profitability. Absent from previous SWMP’s are guidelines for fiscal management and for maintaining a balance between the financial health of the Enterprise Fund and levels of solid waste and moderate risk waste service. This imbalance has led to a level of service equal to or better than King County. However, Jefferson County has far fewer customers and it has resulted in the program’s financial health declining. The cash reserve and Capital fund balances are below the acceptable levels adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. Also absent from the previous SWMP is a focus on creating circular economies with materials moving through local economies many times. Creating these material pathways produces a higher return on investment than other landfill diversion activities and there are numerous partnerships between Public Works, local industry, and non-governmental organizations waiting to be created. The previous SWMP lists as a goal to “encourage and promote the use of private industry to carry out the components of the solid waste system”. This goal has been largely met, and it is carried forward into this SWMP. Triple Bottom Line “Triple Bottom Line” is a term coined by John Elkinton in 1994 and defined by the Harvard Review as, “a business concept that posits firms should commit to measuring their social and environmental impact - in addition to their financial performance - rather than solely focusing on generating profit, or the standard ‘bottom line’.” This concept is often referred to a People, Planet, Profit or “3P”. It is helpful to model the SWMP after a triple bottom line business plan. The inclusion of the Enterprise Fund’s financial health builds on previous SWMP’s focus on social and environmental impacts, providing a manageable balance between them as visualized in the diagram below: 4 Each area of performance influences the other. Changes to any of the performance areas create feedback loops as in this example: Beginning in 2023, Public Works contracted with a local business for an intellectual and developmental disabilities employment program. That program provided various services at the transfer station including litter control. This discretionary program improved the social performance of the solid waste program and, to a lesser extent, its environmental performance while also negatively impacting its economic performance by it increasing operating costs. To offset the negative impact on economic performance, the fee for garbage service must be increased to create more revenue. Because this produced an economic barrier for low-income customers, it could be measured as a reduction in the social performance of the program. To improve the social performance of the solid waste program, Public Works created a low-income discount program modeled after King County. This created a loss of revenue, reducing the economic performance of the Enterprise Fund. To correct that, we subsidized the low-income discount by raising the garbage service fee, causing the other customers to provide that subsidy. The economic pressures that affect the balance between People, Planet, and Profit can be categorized as: 1. Operational Costs: vendor and contractor charges, fuel costs, labor costs, facility and equipment replacement, etc. 2. Level of Service: types of services offered and access to them 3. Unfunded Mandates: legislative requirements for new or expanded services without dedicated new funding Increases to operational costs can be moderated to some degree. Cross training of staff can reduce staffing levels and gain operational efficiencies that reduce costs. Good competitive bidding and procurement practices can also reduce costs. Operational costs are addressed in Chapter 3 – Profit: Economic Performance. Level of service is where Public Works has the greatest potential in reducing costs and improving fund balances. Many of the services provided by Public Works are discretionary, as opposed to mandated by statute, and are a substantial financial burden. Level of Service is addressed in Chapter 4 – Planet: Environmental Performance. Of the above areas of financial impact, Public Works is most limited in managing those associated with unfunded mandates. Public Works can communicate with legislators through organizations such as the Washington Association of Counties or by requesting County Commissioner testimony at a bill’s hearing or by submitting comments via the rule making process after a bill’s passage. Unfunded mandates are addressed in Chapter 5 – People: Social Performance. Guidance on achieving and maintaining a balance between People, Planet, and Profit is addressed in Chapter 6 – Equilibrium. The pictograph below provides a scale of values used in assessing program development and delivery. 5 Less Favored More Favored Goals of the Solid Waste Management Plan In addition to meeting the requirements of State law and other mandates, and consistent with triple bottom line planning, the goals and objectives established by Jefferson County for this Solid Waste Management Plan are: 1. provide a level of service for solid waste and moderate risk waste services that balance Profit, People, and Planet 2. develop partnerships that promote a circular economy 3. encourage and promote the use of private industry to carry out the components of the solid waste system High Cost Small Customer Group Small Environmental Impact Reinforces Consumer Habits Delivered by County Low Cost Benefits All Residents Large Environmental Impact Changes Consumer Habits Creates Partnerships