Laserfiche WebLink
5b. Costs to the resident should be structured to include an <br />incentive to reduce the amount ot waste generated. <br />CONCLUSION: MARKETS <br />6. Current marke� conditions for large quantities of recyclable <br />materials ar� poor, and Ramsey County's recycling faczlities <br />are operating under a temporary agreement. <br />RECOMMENDATTONS <br />5a. Roseville sho�ld be prepared to implem�nt a curbside collec- <br />tion program for recyclable materials when Ramsey County <br />provides a dependable recycling tacility. <br />CONCLUSION <br />6.1 The Metropolitan Council plans to develop markets in the <br />Twin Cities Area, and Ramsey County is having a financial <br />study made concerning recyclab�es. Markefi prices for <br />cez�ain recyclable mater�als appear to be subsidized. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />6.1a Raseville should encourage the Metropolitan Council and <br />Ramsey County to make an in-depth study o� existing market <br />forces affecting prices for recyclables,. and the long-term <br />impact of these forces. <br />CONCLUSION: INCENTTVES AND FUNDS <br />7. The Metropolitan Council admin�sters funds to municipalities <br />for waste abatement programs. Current funds include: <br />o$4.00 per ton of recyclabies (excluding yard wastes) <br />collected in the past year in that city. <br />o Up to $0.50 per household per year as a reimbursement for <br />source separation expenses. <br />o Varying grants to cities for starting recycling (drop-off <br />cen�ers) and composting pzojects. <br />o Varying grants to private enterprises and institutions <br />for market development and waste reduction development. <br />o There are no incentive funds paid to individuals/house- <br />holds for practicing waste reduction. <br />35 <br />