Proposed Amendment To Board Of Health Regulations Would Require Curbside Compost Pickup

Report On The Meeting Of The Amherst Board Of Health, October 14, 2021

Present
Board Members: Nancy Gilbert (Chair), Maureen Millea, Timothy Randhir, Stephen George, Lauren Mills (membership pending).

Staff: Jennifer Brown (Acting Health Director and Staff Liaison)

The meeting was held over Zoom and was recorded. 

Highlights

• Lauren Mills welcomed as newest member.  She will officially join the board once she completes the necessary paperwork.
• Planned review of regulations for DNA, Toxic Chemicals and Refuse Collection that appear to be out-of-date.
• Proposal heard from Zero Waste Amherst to require curbside compost pick-up.
• Board statement on racism as a public health issue.
• Approval of a new well drilling permit at 200 Leverett Road.
• Review of tobacco violation order for Spirit Haus.
• Health Director’s report on COVID-19 and vaccination in town.
• Interview date set for Monday, October 18 for candidate for Health Director.
  

Reviewing Regulations
The Board Of Health (BOH) has 13 regulations. Three are said to be outdated and need to be reviewed. These are regulations for Recombinant DNA, Toxic Chemicals and Refuse Collection and Recycling.  The BOH will be working on them in the coming next year.

With reference to the DNA bylaw, Millea noted that some towns, in updating their regulations, have added a biosafety committee.   She cited a recent update in Watertown, Massachusetts which has a Harvard/MIT biotech joint venture opening next year. Much has changed since the 70’s when DNA regulations were written and when there was a lot of anxiety about genetic manipulation, she said.   Millea has recently reviewed the NIH guidelines and said it is not clear whether Amherst really needs a revision of what is already on the books. She suggested getting some expert help to sort it out. Gilbert noted that UMass labs are not under the town’s jurisdiction for regulation but Amherst College and Hampshire College labs are.  Neither Northampton nor South Hadley, which also host colleges, have a similar regulation. Millea noted that many communities ban higher-risk labs (designated level 4 and up) and that the primary goal of regulations is to insure that local labs are following proper safety protocols.

Steve George, former chair of the Amherst College biosafety committee said that these days there is much more concern about pathogens than genetic manipulation.  Concerns about recombinant DNA (there is only one level four lab in country) are kind of historic, he said,  but we probably ought to have a general bio-safety regulation for the town.  We want to be assured that the colleges are following appropriate safety guidelines, he said. George and Millea will will work on a revision of the regulation.

Tim Randhir and Lauren Mills will work on the revision of the toxic chemical regulation that will include consideration of the current bill that Senator Markey has introduced in the Senate to regulate toxic chemicals in all school buildings. 

Waste Hauler Regulation Amendment
The bulk of the meeting was devoted to a presentation on a proposed amendment to the waste hauler regulation that would require the town to contract for waste hauling services (Amherst residents now contract for those services individually) and would require all haulers bidding for the town contract to provide curbside pickup of organic waste for composting. The proposed amendment was offered by the group  Zero Waste Amherst  (ZWA) and was presented by John Root, former chair of the town’s refuse and recycling committee and Town Councilor  Darcy DuMont (District 5).  The presentation can be viewed here.  The draft of the proposed amendment can be viewed here.  A fact sheet on the amendment  can be viewed here.

Root reported that the town’s now-defunct Refuse and Recycling  Committee had previously drafted a solid waste master plan that was received with enthusiasm but was never formally adopted and got lost in the transition to the new Council form of government. He indicated that both prior and recent work (such as a Smith College Study and a recent Department of Environmental Protection assistance grant to Amherst) recommended changes to the hauler system.  All members of the board seemed sympathetic with the goals of the proposal but deliberated on whether the BOH was the proper body to institute such a change. Their deliberations centered on whether the BOH had the authority to promulgate such regulations. George and Randir thought that the mandate of the BOH was very narrow and that this belonged in the hands of elected officials. Millea and Gilbert were inclined to see the disposition of trash as a public health issue and within the purview of the BOH, which already has a waste and recycling regulation that is up for review.  

The Proposal
ZWA requested the following from the BOH:

1. Review ZWA’s proposal to amend the BOH regulations to add a pilot waste hauling program that will move the Town toward achieving zero waste and climate action goals, increase transparency and reduce the cost of waste disposal to residents.

2. Develop a list of questions and suggestions within a month.

3. Work with ZWA to finalize the amended regulations.

4. Vote to adopt the amended regulations within 90 days.

The presenters argued that the BOH was the proper body to initiate this action because:

1. Waste reduction is a public health issue.
2. We need to reduce the amount of trash we dispose of. 
3. All “disposal” methods have serious public health drawbacks, especially for environmental justice communities.
4. Landfills emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
5. Landfills leach toxins into our soil and water.
6. Pollution from waste to energy incinerators causes serious health impacts.
7. The state is officially behind Zero Waste but is not yet taking aggressive action to achieve its goals.
8. Reducing waste cannot the be the sole responsibility of individual residents.
9. The Board of Health has the jurisdiction over this issue and the opportunity to make a significant impact by taking the lead on this proposal.

The primary elements of the proposed amendment are:

1. Change from individual subscription services with residents to a hauler contract with the Town (Require the town to request bids from hauling firms, with the RFP specifying services to be provided by the hauler)
2. Phase 1 of the Pilot program would be applicable only to one to four-family residences. Extending services to multi-family residences and businesses etc. that use dumpsters will require more planning, and will be added at a later time.
3. Specifically excluded are multi-family residences, businesses, institutions and homeowners associations. Studying in particular how to include apartment complexes could start with resident focus groups.

How Would The Proposed Amendment Help?
Root made the following points in his presentation:

1. Curbside pickup of compostable materials is included in basic service (the most important feature of the proposal, without which it would not be effective). Diverting compostable materials reduces trash by at least 40%. Including curbside compostable materials pickup in basic service would significantly increase the number of residents reducing their trash in this way. Residents would receive three toters – one for trash, one for recycling and one for compostables.
2. Requiring local compost processing produces a valuable organic fertilizer and reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
3. A standard fee is charged for recycling and compostable materials pickup (regardless of amount) plus an additional fee based on the amount of trash.
4. A pay-per-bag, or equivalent program and less frequent pickup are incentives that dramatically reduce waste.
5. Dual stream recycling would be preferred, if available.
6. Curbside bulky waste pickup. Certain bulky items such as rugs, furniture and appliances will be picked up curbside several times a year, including student move out/move in times.
7. More frequent hazardous waste collection.
8. Maintenance of the transfer station option for trash, recycling and compostable materials collection.
9. Transparent pricing of services and pickup schedule posted by the hauler.
10. Avoidance of excess truck miles driven (emissions, pollution, noise, wear and tear on town roads).
11. Long-term planning by hauler for emissions reduction from hauler vehicles and operations.
12. Data collection and reporting, including tonnage of refuse removed, to establish baseline data and measure progress toward Zero Waste and Climate Action goals.
13. Detailed public education provided by the hauler
    

Discussion
George said that as sympathetic as he is with the presentation, it’s difficult for him to see this proposal as being inside the purview (i.e., the charge) of the BOH. He is concerned that as unelected officials, board members need to tread carefully on what they impose on the public and suggested that it would be unethical to go beyond their charge. He said that if we can’t demonstrate that putting organics into a landfill diminishes public health the proposed amendment is outside of the BOH charge.

Root responded that composting keeps waste out of an incinerator and out of a landfill and that mitigates the terrible consequences noted in his presentation. 

George in turn responded that war, poverty, and all kinds of things impact health but foreign policy and anti-poverty work fall outside of the BOH mandate. He said that he fails to see a direct health outcome from trash disposal. He said that he had  looked at some of the cities that did adopt a composting mandate – (e.g., Hamilton Massachusetts, Boulder, Colorado,  Seattle, Washington) and all were initiated by elected officials and without involvement of the BOH.  “Our charge is narrow and there will be blowback against our other established rules if we overstep our mandate,” he said.

DuMont noted that she had originally taken the idea of hauler reform to the Town Services and Outreach Committee and they directed her to bring her proposal to the BOH noting that this fell under the umbrella of current regulations. DuMont emphasized that the BOH has regulations on the books that specifically regulate haulers. 

Randhir also thought the proposal fell outside of the board’s purview. “I’m not convinced that this has a direct bearing on public health. This is a solid waste management issue,” he said noting that violations of solid waste regulations are resolved to DEP, not the BOH.  “DPW manages water quality and water treatment,” he said. “If there was a specific disease or health impact – that would be cause for us to intervene.”

Root said he can come up with figures that connect incinerators and ground and air pollution to disease and death. He said he can’t come up with figures on how Amherst residents are specifically impacted by these environmental insults but there is no question that pollution is a public health issue.  For example, pollution is terrible in Springfield and it’s the asthma capital of the state.  There’s no question that there’s a health impact from trash disposal, even if we can’t isolate it precisely for this locality. He said the BOH has a responsibility to anticipate the future impact of these things as they become more severe.

Randhir agreed that water and air quality are health issues but said he does not  see any connection to composting. 

Root replied that if we can divert 50% from the waste stream (a common outcome from mandatory composting programs) – from incinerators and being buried,  there is an obvious reduction that wouldn’t happen if this material wasn’t diverted.

Millea said “We already have BOH regulations that mandate recycling – this feels like an extension of regulations that we already have rather than generating new regulations that expand our authority.  It seems to me that we do have the authority to do this.”

Gilbert concluded that this is a public health issue and it becomes a justice issue when we consider that many communities export their trash and make it the problem of someone else’s locality.

Elayne Berger from the League of Women Voters spoke in support of the amendment saying that she sees this as very much within the purview of the BOH.  She said that if the BOH doesn’t want to take it up themselves, the issue can be brought to the Town Council to take it up.

Samuel Gladstone said the Amherst BOH has a history of being out front on public health issues.  “When I was Chair we were among the first communities that banned smoking in bars,” he said. “Lots of push back and now it is the norm. You are being asked to take the lead. You have people to help you take this on. Don’t step away from the opportunity to lead.”  

Millea asked for specific examples of communities where the BOH took the lead in implemented  community composting.

Root responded that he did not have any examples at the moment but asserted that solid waste is clearly part of the BOH mandate.

DuMont pointed out that Hamilton was the first town in Massachusetts to ban organics in the waste stream and that ZWA has been talking to them. In their case, the initiative came from the Select Board and not the BOH.

George said that if we make a regulation, it needs to be both enforceable and enforced. He said it’s hard to see how the BOH could take on enforcement for trash.

Root replied that we’re not talking about enforcement now.  This is all about creating opportunities and incentivizing composting.

George asked why regulation is needed. 

Root responded that the regulation was necessary because there are very few opportunities right now. “If we offer that 3^rd bin and there is an incentive to use it because folks will quickly realize that they save money (because of pay-per-throw), then this will dramatically reduce the volume of the waste stream,” he said.

Gilbert said that she will solicit an opinion from the Massachusetts Association of Public health concerning the trends on this statewide.

George emphasize that he thinks that the town should do this and that it is outside of the jurisdiction of the BOH. “We can help he said, “but it has to have town buy-in. This comes with costs and staffing.  It’s something we should definitely do as a town.”  He also wondered where the original recycling mandate in BOH regulations came from.

Root  replied that in the late 80s the state gave all BOHs jurisdiction over solid waste and pollution.

With the BOH appearing split on whether it had the authority to take on the proposal, DuMont asked if the BOH would request that the Town Manager or the DPW come up with a cost analysis of the proposal. Gilbert said that she was willing to work with DuMont to make that request and bring it back to BOH.

Randhir protested that the request shouldn’t be coming from the BOH but from the people who control the money.  It ought to originate with the Town Council, he said. 

Mills wondered why taxpayers would have to bear the burden of this new regulation.  

Gilbert responded that taxpayers already bear the full burden for waste disposal under the current system and the new regulation might provide some relief.

Root reminded the board that there is already a state mandate requiring large producers of organic waste to divert to composting and that the proposed amendment is consistent with that trend.

Radhir said “I don’t think it’s fair to increase the disposal costs for families.  So, the first step would need to be to do the economic analysis and see what that would cost people.”

Next Steps
Geroge said that there must be some involvement of the Town Council and Town Manager and that the initiative must come from people who are elected. He asked that an economic analysis be requested from them. The board then agreed to send a letter from the BOH to the Town manager, copying in the Town Council and making such a request.  The letter will be drafted by George and discussed at the next BOH meeting.

Racism As A Public Health Issue
Gilbert reminded the board that a prepared set of statements by the board on racism as a public health problem is complete and just needs to be signed by the board before it is released to the public. It was approved at the last BOH meeting.

New Well Drilling Permitted
Edward Smith, Health Inspector for the Town, reported on a well application for 200 Leverett Road. The BOH approved drilling permit for the well unanimously (4-0 with Mills not voting because she has not yet been sworn in).  

Tobacco Violation Order At Spirit Haus
The board discussed the second sale to a minor within a 36 month period. The fine for this violation is $2000.  Spirit Haus paid a $1000 fine on June 29 for its first violation. The second violation also requires suspension of tobacco sales for 7 days. which was implemented for the period October 5-11. The violation also required retail training for staff. Brown reported that there are 19 tobacco sellers licenses currently active in town and suggested that it would be useful to review regulations with all of them.

Health Directors Report
COVID numbers are coming down in town. As of October 14 there are 26 active cases in Amherst – down from 357 on September 15.

Jennifer Brown said that she would like to retain the mask mandate in town for the immediate future.  She reported on the community COVID-19 testing program that has begun at the Bangs Center and is managed by UMass.  And she called attention to the ongoing vaccine program at the Bangs center, reporting that the vaccine rate for town for at least one dose is 77% and schools are at 80%. The Health Department plans to go into schools on Oct 19 and in early November and are gearing up for vaccinating children 5 once that protocol up is cleared by the CDC.

Gilbert reported that interviews for new Health Director will be held on Monday October 18 at 2 p.m.