Laserfiche WebLink
<br />respondents in the weekly collection area preferred their method. <br /> <br />While residents preferred the method they tested, most were not willing to pay more for the service. <br />Residents were asked if they were willing to pay more and if so how much. They were given price <br />increments of$.25, $.50, $1.00 and $5.00 a month more. In the Single-Stream area 49% of respondents said <br />they were willing to pay more for the service and 45% of respondents in the weekly collection area said they <br />were willing to pay more. The exception was the more affluent Contrast area where 64% of respondents said <br />they were willing to pay more for single-stream service. Thirty-six percent of those in the Contrast area <br />willing to pay more said they'd pay a dollar a month more. Respondents in the Two Bin area were not asked <br />if they would be willing to pay more because under the current program they can get the two bins with <br />wheels without an additional charge. <br /> <br />Respondents were asked to rank what they valued most in a recycling prograI11 and wanted the City to <br />Table 11 consider wh~n making any changes. The <br />What Do You Value Most in the Recycling Program choices were: how convenient the <br />Ranked from 1 - 4 with one bein the most im orlant. Avera e Rank program is to uSe, how much they pay for <br />th~ program, howl1luch the program <br />benefits the environl1lent, and how much <br />information the City sends about <br />recycling. Choices were ranked from I - <br />4 with one being the most important. <br />The top three choices were closely <br />ranked with Environmental Benefit first at 1.93 average rank,fol1?wed try Convenience at 1.95 average rank <br />and Cost at 2.08 average rank. The amount of informatiqllsent wilssubstantially behind at 3.26 average <br />rank. <br /> <br />1.93 <br />1.95 <br />2.08 <br />3.26 <br /> <br />How much the program benefits the environment <br />How convenient the program is for me to use <br />How much I pay for the program <br />How much information the City sends me aboutrecycling <br /> <br />Participants in the single-strealIlte~t areas~ere also askedjf they were concerned about issues raised by <br />members of the public in commu1licatiol)s"Yithth~ Cityc;ouncil during the summer of 2003. The issues <br />raised were that a nati?!1~l~tudy show~~collectionCqsts for single-stream go down while the local vendor is <br />offering the servic~at a price il1cr~ase, thilt.~here was no competition for lower rates because only one <br />company offer~the service, or th<it}llore ma~etialmay be thrown away at recycling center due to damage or <br />contamination. Respondents could also choose that they were not concerned about any of these. <br /> <br />In the Single-stream afe<i46% of respondents said they were concerned that there was no competition, 30% <br />were concerned that morelIlilteriallll<lY be thrown out, 30% were not concern about any of these issues and <br />27% were concerned that local prices increase. <br /> <br />In the Contrast area 42% of respondents said they were concerned that there was no competition, 34% were <br />not concerned about any of these issues, 29% were concerned that local prices increase, and 28% were <br />concerned that more material may be thrown out. <br /> <br />Results specific to individual test areas are detailed in profile sections for each area. <br /> <br />The surveys and results are Appendix E. <br /> <br />24 <br />