Sustainability Commission
Regular MeetingDeerfield, IL · January 21, 2016
Minutes
MEETING MINUTES
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
January 21, 2016
A meeting of the Sustainability Commission was held on Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 7:00 pm at
Deerfield Village Hall, 850 Waukegan Road, at 7:00 PM in the Community Conference Room 206.
Chairman Don Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
In attendance were:
Present:
Don Anderson, Chairman
Daniel Dorfman
Laurie Leibowitz
Michael Shalen
Brian Wolkenberg
Absent was:
Richard Heller
Gloria Threats
Jerry Witkovsky
Also present:
Jeri Cotton, Secretary
Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Wolkenberg moved to approve the minutes from the December 17, 2015 Sustainability
Commission meeting. Commissioner Shalen seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously on a
voice vote with Commissioner Shalen abstaining.
Public Comment
There were no public comments on non-agenda items.
Energy Assessment Program
Ch. Anderson explained the Commission was updated at the December 17 2015 meeting, and there were
several action items. Commissioner Wolkenberg reached out to Principal McConnell but has not heard
back from him. He is awaiting information from the District 109 meeting.
Commissioner Wolkenberg spoke about identifying a business/industry partner with successful energy
conservation efforts to speak to the school. Commissioner Dorfman would be willing to assist in
contacting Commissioner Threats regarding Walgreens.
Water Assessment Program
a. Draft Tap Water Resource Documents
Commissioner Leibowitz met with representatives from EarthWorks, the assistant principal from DHS,
and Assistant Village Manager Lichterman about the “Take the Pledge – Drink Tap Water!” program.
Commissioner Leibowitz showed a draft “Pledge” and recommended creating a link to the “Pledge”. She
Sustainability Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 2 of 3
also provided some resource materials including a link to the Deerfield Sustainability Commission
website. She believes having people sign a pledge would be better than other possibilities.
Commissioner Leibowitz noted the school has five water fountains for refillable bottles. Four of the
fountains have counters. The school will create a baseline to determine if more people are refilling
bottles. Commissioner Leibowitz explained the school wants to add more recycling. She suggested they
contact SWALCO for recycling signage. She reported they were excited about being part of the water
initiative.
Commission Leibowitz noted the school expressed concern about the $5 cost of the bottles, but pointed
out the school bookstore could sell the bottles. She noted this will be a Deerfield-wide initiative.
Commissioner Dorfman asked if the bottle would have a logo. Commissioner Leibowitz showed a
sample image. She will follow up with the school in a couple weeks if she has not heard back from them.
Commissioner Leibowitz will also work with Mr. Lichterman to get the bottles donated.
Commissioner Leibowitz reported a representative from EarthWorks would like to be involved with the
Commission. She asked that Mr. Lichterman follow up on this.
Review of Commercial and Residential Recycling Rates
Ch. Anderson explained there are six communities in Lake County that have a commercial recycling
franchise. Two communities have had them for four years. The Village has an 11.8% recycle rate.
Grayslake and Highland Park have had commercial recycling for four years; the Village’s 11.8% rate is
good for the first year. Ch. Anderson noted Whole Foods was able to opt-out. Mr. Dorfman questioned
the participation rate. Ch. Anderson believes it is the percentage of businesses that use recycling bins, but
that information is not collected by our hauler. The commercial franchise hauler thought Deerfield’s rate
was good for the first year. Commissioner Shalen indicated the rate is the amount recycled versus the
amount of discarded trash.
Ch. Anderson shared the residential information for both waste and recycling. Deerfield’s residential
recycling rate (tons recycled/tons recycled + tons landfilled) is 32%. By comparison, Deerfield is #4 in
Lake County out of the 44 participating communities measured in the documents. Deerfield is #9 in total
waste generated.
Ch. Anderson discussed the report on Household Chemical Waste. The Village annually hosts a drop-off
location at the high school and attendance continues to grow. The HCW program will continue.
The commissioners discussed disposal of prescription drugs.
Other Items for Discussion
Commission Leibowitz asked that Lisa Johnson, head of EarthWorks, be included in the Commission’s
distribution. Her email address is ljohnson@dist113.org.
At the next meeting, Ch. Anderson asked Mr. Lichterman to discuss the Village’s communication plans
for prescription drug disposal and recycling.
Adjournment
Sustainability Commission
January 21, 2016
Page 3 of 3
There being no further business or discussion, Commission Shalen moved to adjourn the meeting.
Commission Wolkenberg seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 pm.
The next Sustainability Commission meeting will take place on Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 7:00 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeri Cotton
Secretary
Agenda
AGENDA
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
January 21, 2016
7:00 P.M.
COMMUNITY CONFERENCE ROOM 206
1. Consideration of Minutes of December 17, 2015
2. Public Comment
3. Energy Assessment Program
4. Water Assessment Program
a. Draft Tap Water Resource Documents
5. Review of Commercial and Residential Recycling Rates
6. Other Items for Discussion
7. Next Meeting Date and Time – TBD
MEETING MINUTES
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
December 17, 2015
The Sustainability Commission met at Deerfield Village Hall, 850 Waukegan Road, at 7 PM in Community
Conference Room 206 on Thursday, December 17, 2015. In attendance were:
Present:
Don Anderson, Chairman
Daniel Dorfman
Richard Heller
Laurie Leibowitz
Jerry Witkovsky
Brian Wolkenberg
Absent:
Gloria Threats
Michael Shalen
Also Present:
Andrew Lichterman, Assistant to the Village Manager
Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Shalen motioned and Commissioner Witkovsky seconded to approve the minutes from the
November 19, 2015 meeting. The minutes were unanimously approved.
Public Comment
None
Energy Assessment Program
Commissioner Wolkenberg summarized that at the last meeting the Commission agreed to build from the success
the program enjoyed with Kipling last year and to pursue broader community involvement this year. He noted the
Village can provide a platform for connecting people and promoting the energy conservation activities. The
subcommittee drafted talking points and a case study based on last year’s experience, which was shared with
District 109 in a recent meeting. He noted Principal McConnell was very encouraging. He noted that energy
conservation is a district wide initiative this year, and includes a plan for the district to reduce energy consumption
over the next 2 years. Commissioner Wolkenberg will share a copy of the plan with the Commission when it is
available.
A district wide meeting on the subject will be held in January. McConnell noted that he hopes to form a district
wide group that includes a representative of the Sustainability Commission with the goal of creating curriculum for
the elementary and middle schools.
Also, McConnell requested the Village help identify a business/industry partner with successful energy
conservation efforts that could come speak at the school. Chairman Anderson requested that Mr. Lichterman reach
out to Commissioner Threats directly with this request for Walgreens’ participation.
Commisioner Wolkenberg summarized the subcommittee’s ideas regarding communication efforts around this
initiative. He noted that the schools and classroom will use social media and it was suggested that
#GreenUpDeerfield be used on Twitter.
Chairman Anderson summarized 4 action steps moving forward:
1. Identify business partners. Possible partners could include Walgreens, Lake Shore Recycling, Waste
Management, Whole Foods, BP gas station. The DBR Chamber of Commerce is also a resource.
2. Have a member of the Sustainability Commission participate in the District 109 team that is formed in
January.
3. Help identify resources that can be used for curriculum or classroom activities. Commissioner Dorfman
noted that he has gathered some of these resources already. Mr. Lichterman noted the packet includes
template curriculum documents that were created as part of the Waste Management “Recycle Often. Reycle
Right” campaign
4. Identify ambassadors in the community that can help advocate for these initiatives.
Commissioner Witkovsky reported that he works closely with Caruso Middle School and volunteered to make
contacts there too. Possible measurements could include # of emails gained and # of hits on the website.
Commissioner Dorfman noted the USGBC conference is being held in April with topics around green education.
He inquired if the Village would support a commissioner attending such a conference. Mr. Lichterman noted that if
the conference itinerary was relevant and the Commission supported sending a representative then funding could be
considered.
Water Assessment Program
Commissioners Leibowitz and Witkovsky summarized the recent tour of the Highland Park water treatment plant.
It was noted that Lake Michigan is an ideal source of drinking water. The Highland Park plant was upgraded last
year.
Commissioner Leibowitz reported that she attempted to contact the author of the article Bottled Water: United
States Consumers and Their Perceptions of Water Quality but Iowa State University noted the author is no longer
available and was unable to provide any further information.
Commissioner Leibowitz noted the subcommittee will meet to refine their recommendation but at this point, they
are contemplating a campaign that encourages the use of reusable water bottles as an alternative to purchasing
bottled water. This effort will be coupled with an educational campaign citing the benefits associated with
municipal water.
Commissioner Dorfman noted the conflict with citing the safety of municipal water while also recommending the
use of a filter. Mr. Lichterman noted that his understanding is that a filter is recommended due to the water
traveling through an underground distribution system.
Dorfman also suggested offering filters for home faucets but recognized this may be less economical than a
reusable water bottle campaign.
Mr. Lichterman reminded the Commission that Sports Authority also tentatively agreed to a coupon campaign for
reusable water bottles for the week leading up to Earth Day.
Chairman Anderson requested that Commissioner Leibowitz contact the High School to get feedback regarding the
water bottle filling stations that were installed in partnership with the Commission a few years ago.
Commercial Waste Recycling
Mr. Lichterman noted the 3rd quarter commercial waste hauling report indicated an 11% recycling rate for Deerfield
commercial businesses.
Chairman Anderson requested Mr. Lichterman report back on recycling rates for neighboring communities and
verify the Village’s residential recycling rate as well.
Other Items for Discussion
Mr. Lichterman noted that a subcommittee of the NSEAC will review and evaluate responses to the RFIQ at a
meeting tomorrow.
Adjournment
Commissioner Dorfman motioned to adjourn. Commissioner Witkovsky seconded. The meeting was adjourned at
8:10 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Lichterman, Assistant to the Village Manager
Take the Pledge – Drink Tap Water!
Deerfield tap water is safe according to frequent tests required by stringent EPA
standards and is highly rated. Bottled water is not safer than tap water with little
oversight or transparency about source and quality.
Deerfield tap water is a bargain – less than half a penny per gallon compared to an
average of $1.70 per gallon for a 24 pack of 16.8 ounce bottles, 312 times as
expensive!
Tap water is the environmentally friendly choice. Millions of barrels of oil are
used to produce plastic bottles and about 75% end up in a landfill, about 1 million
tons per year nationwide. Transportation creates additional environmental costs.
Your information: (On the website, could we create a link that would send an email
confirming the pledge and set up a file so we can track and go back to people who
pledge?)
First name:
Last Name
Email
Zip Code
Pledge:
I pledge to:
Choose tap water over bottled water whenever possible
Fill a reusable bottle with tap water
Support policies that promote clean, affordable tap water for all.
Your Name
Why drink Deerfield tap water?
It’s safe
It’s inexpensive
It’s the environmentally friendly choice
It tastes great!
Safety
The Village of Deerfield gets its water from Lake Michigan, among the cleanest in the
nation. Deerfield water meets or exceeds strict EPA regulations and is tested
frequently using a newer technology that offers faster results.
Bottled water is frequently tap water and lightly regulated by the FDA. Water
quality and source should be available but frequently is not, according to a study by
the Environmental Working Group.
Cost
Deerfield water costs $.005 per gallon while bottled water costs range from $1.50 to
$3.00 per gallon. Deerfield tap water is a bargain!
Environmental Impact
Millions of barrels of oil are used to produce plastic bottles and about 75% end up in
a landfill, about 1 million tons per year nationwide. Water is also used in the
production of plastic bottles and transportation creates additional environmental
costs.
Taste
Take a taste test and compare Deerfield water to your favorite bottled water! Taste
tests will be offered at events throughout 2016.
Take the pledge! Drink Tap Water!
Here’s how it works:
Sign a pledge(link) to choose tap water over bottled water whenever possible and
get a dishwasher safe reusable water bottle for only $5. Proudly use your bottle at
work, home and school while saving money and helping the environment.
Encourage your friends and neighbors to join you in a pledge to Drink Tap Water!
“Drink Tap Water” Resources
Village of Deerfield
Sustainability Commission
Articles:
Bottled Water: United States Consumers and Their Perceptions of Water Quality:
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, February 2011
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3084479/
2011 Bottled Water Scorecard: Environmental Working Group
http://static.ewg.org/reports/2010/bottledwater2010/pdf/2011‐bottledwater‐
scorecard‐report.pdf?_ga=1.239926595.1198594165.1453132673
Bottled or Tap? By Stephen C. Edberg, PhD for the Drinking Water Research
Foundation
http://www.thefactsaboutwater.org/ask‐the‐experts/bottled‐or‐tap/
Cities Tout Municipal Tap Water as Better Than Bottled: Governing .com, April 2012
http://www.governing.com/topics/energy‐env/gov‐cities‐tout‐municipal‐tap‐
water‐as‐better‐than‐bottled.html
“Drink Tap Water Campaigns” in Washington DC and New York City Links
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/drinking_water/wotg.shtml
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycwater/html/bottle/index.shtml
https://www.dcwater.com/drinking_water/tap.cfm
https://www.dcwater.com/drinking_water/Ten_Reasons_to_Drink_Tap.pdf
https://www.dcwater.com/drinking_water/Tap_Bottle_Water.pdf
Village of Deerfield Sustainability Commission Website
http://www.deerfield.il.us/residents/greenupdeerfield/default.aspx
Commercial Hauling Ordinance Page 2 of 2
Deerfield
Recycling Rate - - - 11.6 %
Participation Rate - - - -
Grayslake
Recycling Rate - - - 8.5 %
Participation Rate - - - 30.0 %
Gurnee
Recycling Rate - - - -
Participation Rate - - - -
Highland Park
Recycling Rate 19.2 % 20.4 % 15.7 % -
Participation Rate 68.0 % 70.0 % 70.0 % 71.0 %
Highwood
Recycling Rate 5.2 % 5.3 % - -
Participation Rate - - - 54.0 %
Libertyville
Recycling Rate - - - -
Participation Rate - - - -
Disclaimer Site Map Contact Us
http://www.swalco.org/Recycling/Pages/CommercialHaulingOrdinance.aspx 1/19/2016
Memo to the Board of Directors January 21, 2016
I- 4. 3rd Quarter 2015 Recycling and Per Ton Payment Report
BACKGI~OUND: Attached are the reported tabulations of residential recyclables and
waste for the 3nl quarter of 2015. Tonnage totals are reported by qua1ter for the calendar year.
The information is provided by refuse hauling companies servicing residential customers in Lake
County.
The 2013 and 2014 tonnage figures are listed for comparison purposes. The first nine
months of20 15 illustrate that 42.917 tons of recyclables were collected from Lake County
comnHmitics. Compared to pre\'ious year's lirst nine month totals, Lake County communities
have experienced a 4.3% decrease in recycling volume as compared to the same period of 2014
(44,828 tons). Waste generation rates declined by 1% during this same period. Overall, the
volume of both waste and recycling collected during this period has declined by approximately
I .8% from the same period of 2014. This trend is illustrated in the attached Waste and Recycling
Comparison table.
Market values, for all recyclable commodities remain at historical lows. Regretfully this
trend will continue through to the end of the year, with little optimism for them to strengthen in
the tirst quarter of2016. Due to the stagnant markets, Agency Member Per Ton Payments
remained at zero for the three months of the third quarter.
ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS: Municipal Summary Table- 3rd Quarter 2015 Recycling
Summary; Municipal Summary Table- 3rd Quat1er 2015 Waste Disposal Summary; Waste and
Recycling Comparison Table January- September 2013 - 20 IS; SWALCO Members Per Ton
Payment Summary 3rd Qtr. 20 IS; Qum1crly Single Stream Value Calculation for SW ALCO
Contract Rebalt! Q3 :w IS
STAFF: Peter Adrian. Recycling Coordinator.
Solid Waste Agency of Lake County
Municipal Waste Disposal Summary
3rd Quarter 2015
(as rvported by haula,.l
3rd Qtr 2nd Qtr 1st Qtr 1st- 3rcl 1et · 3rd 1st· 3rd
MUNICIPALITY SERVICE PROVIDER !Jul 2015 Aug 2016!Sep 2016 2015 2015 2016 Qtr 2015 Qtr 2014 Qtr 2013
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
[ANTIOCH' waste , Inc. Antioch 278.60 272.50 274.60 825.70 110.00 532.50 2,12~ 2,41' 2,37
IAA ts\JRN' · Reevcllna Svetema 26.5: 22.59 20.76 &'J.9: 103.48 r1.46 24 301 184
[BeACH PARK' AdvallC9d O&soosal ServiCeS. Wat.llellao "'ti4 2! J.41 01 3!1 ()I; 156.3-<1 ,133. 91:' 4fj -~ 1 3~ 1 72t
IBEACH PARK Waste . Inc At11rocl1 107 24;
[RF.ACH PARK Groot lndustnes
[BEACH PARK" TOTAl 464.21 3 11.08 1,156.3< 1, 17.4C 3,207 2. 32
[DEERFIELD' Waste Inc. Wheeling 464.6• ~.65 1,372.61 1, 1, lliS. 3,760 3. 3. 51
DEER PARK' Groot 94. 1.46 ~ 160.3~ _!I1 60
OX ~AKE' Waste , Inc. Antioch _!90.1 1.6C 559.9C ~ 1.442 1,29 1,52'
.lRMSLAKE Waste .Inc Anl<>c:t _4~1( 395 2( -~ooc 1.2~ _!.!503< 1.ozesc
:ORAYSlf•K£ Or~p-Ofi Waste . In<: Ani oocll 0 oc 10( 0. 0. ~
[GRA VSLAKE' rAL 4: .H 3 i.21 3 1,201 1,150. 1,021 .JB 3.69 3.71
GREEN OAKS' Groot 1 i.1~ 1< 1,81 1· 33( 292. 26l 8' 1.20 1,22!
Waste . Inc. Antioch 54 ~.oc 6 i,OI 4 1,66: 1.471. 1.26l 4.27 4,781 4.9~1
[HAINESVILLE' I Oiapgsal Sorvlces. t6.8~ !.41 1.0~ _2~ - 20_!: ~ _6.)1 56c 528
\YV ttvKr-t wooos· Waste • Inc. '//heeling Z81 Z21i.41 736.44 . 719. 603.7 ~.0 2.03• .933
ii:i:i• ,..,., PARK' I Disposal Servicn 59 66<1.01 ..1,I2 1.0~ 2, 14. 1,482.0( 5. 4,79' 4,952
Dlsnosal Services 1C 7·1.81 282.0: 12. 2 74.0f 8 IJl 899
[I~ LAND LAKE' Waste , Inc. \ntloch 191 181).71 _li81 I_! ~~5C 1,671 1 iS 1.S9C
[K LOEER' Waste , Inc. Wheeling 130.3~ 110.3f 130.8 37 ~ 2 IZ.Z~ 991 1 .06!
:AKEBARRING' ON Waste- . Inc. Antioch 11· ·.oc 11:~.80 108.8C JJI 3• .9C 2r3.1C 96• 1 99(
I·,Kl ~llJf'> Grootlnd"''""" 1()!j~: 1266! 126 7: 3& 87 51 1? 5! I 06, ~ 03 ' '-)';~
[LAKE BLUFF'
Groor indo;st,.cs
TOTAl
1_6_4_!
126.90
14 7!
141.47 148.119 ~6 .31 4<1!1'1 ~ __1_.2
141
, 16(
1,21
-A • FOREST' Munk:lpel Collection 587.01 611 511.7~ 1l90.21 _1~! 1 150.57 .!,0. 4. 4.91
_1\ :viLLA' Waste ~nt. Inc. Antioch 119. 113.at 33( 185.21:
.A •ZURICH' Waste . Inc. Wheellna 678. 506.81 1,671 1 1 169.41 4. 4.
-'" .tt riiiLLE' Groot 419.1 .l C05.62 __1_J!1 1 ~ 4. 4,
ltJ~nl IIISHIRE' Waste , Inc. Wheeling ~j 1 205.0S 601 132.2• 1,6 1
:INDENHURS' Groot Industries 3 46i'.21 372.U _1,237.81 1,2i _1 ~ ,5211 3,581 3,51
ONG GROVE' Waste , Inc. Wheeling ze: ..s· zs1.1c ·.1 842.se e90.5~ !.40• 2.3ll
I MUNDELEIN Groot lndustrl.. 66::.8! 731.~ 2, 18'1.91 2,27\1.2 1 ,699.6~ t ,161 ;.01 6.91
INOR I :1ARRINGTON Waste . Inc _AntiOcll 135,5( 27 348 5( 286 1 91 13 , 3-<<
I"'OR IH I'Af.if.IINGTON Prsorell!IIO Disposal & Recycll:1g Servia!$
INORTH BARRING' OW TOTAl 138.6~ 135.6~ __1_.00~ 1.13( 1.341
INORTH CHICAGO• DisPOSal Services. waukegan 405.61 333.6! _hl7! 3.40l 3,26:
Advar.Q!Q O.Soosal ServiC85 Waulle<~an 70 8( 50.().! ~ .31 185. 201 4< 188.6:: 57~ 711
Waste . Inc AntiOCh
GLNTC Housing• 70.8C _$0.0! 64.31 185.11 zou: 188.6: 5 71 66:
[PARK CITY' 29.1C 40.7~ M-0~ 9~ ~ :n.o~ 27! 28: 27
r -OfU BARRING' 'ON' Wasta , Inc Antioch 39.2( 38.5C 26: 321
POR' . BARRING' ON' P1111ireland Dis~o&al & ReC\Icl~na Serv&ces
PORT BAkttiNuiUI'I Tl TAL 39 38.61 120.9( 64.3( 3. 321 321
1 Sy1tema 141 114.9' 1: 432.6: 309.61 1 1.08! 95!
[ROUND LAKE• Waste , Inc. Antioch 422. 388.7( 31 _1, !1 __1_,203.2( 1,053.8( _M 3,7111 3.69!
IRI UNO I.AKE BEACH" Waste , Inc. Antioch 691. 691.2( 596.11 1 ra.ac _1.7ll-TI ~~ 5,471 5,601
wums-tAKe Cl..Oof 83.5! 65.1: 65.11 13.81 216.2• 179.8( 65! 66~
RC UNO LA Kl PARK• Acvanced Orsoosal Servoc:es Waukeoan f.<
aOUNO LJ,K(: PARK' Groot lndu5lrii!S ~QI 11633 1481: ~ 42i' 8( 27891: 12:3 1 04~
ROiJNO l.l.KE PARK.- Waste Inc AntiOCh 63 9C 5300 6121: 17819 ~ ~ 53i Sit
ROUND LAKE PARK' T( rAL 215.9S 189.33 209.37 59_4.§9 ~2_1 428.8~ 1,666 1,611 1,399
HIRI .AKE' Waste Inc. Antioch 51.60 38.30 44.6~ 134.40 14~.6~ 88.0~ 36: 388 402
Waste •nc Anloocr. 68 2C 103 JC 7i 8<
P• a;retana Oospou: & Recyaong Se<vteea 17 9( __1l_9:
ltb\lllER LAKES' TOTAL 3_8.60 29.70 17.90 8§.j> _103.3~ 77.8~ 26: 30! 311
[VERNON HIL _s· Disposal Services. 627.23 563.1: 593.1' 1,6113.5l 1,68~_&ll ~ ~ 4,615 4.38:
IVOlD' Groot Industries 11' .1' 131.50 104.0~ 351.6i ~~ 292.7' 895
IVIAIJS\'J( •R I ll' Groot ~oduslf',es S2 9E •01 824~ 2504< 2166~ 192. 65 902
I.,_, I <<.:Wf1" I H' Was1e 1 Inc Ani lOCh 23!: 23C 2.2( 6 8( 6.0 59( ~~
lfl Ill' Prll!rcta<lC DISI)Osal & Recyctn; SeJ•r.:es. s
II' L.,._e• Dlol>osal 7. r IX 2' .OC __Q_Q(: ~ 42 55
Advancad Disposal Servoces W-Illa.~ 32.1!( 22 ~ 79. i9 1 73 51 252
OTAL 134.81 10: 14. 357. Jl 231.9~ 117
WA CONDA' Waste: , Inc. Antioch ~93.8( 241 96.!jC .J1J. 667.6~ ~.09 2. .364
[WAUKEGAN' I Disposal Services. W•uhn•n 2,213.99 1,88! 1, 35.8~ _!&UJ ~!,_:~ __11 i,26 15, 16,S80
IWTNfHROP IAPA' Groot Industries 196.23 152.8~ 57.89 506.9 _!()_3.7 412.41 .42 1649 1,74[
IZION" Disposal Services. 734.76 634.~ 816.84 2,186.0 1,84J.BE M1W i.44: 5.478 -5.161
LAKE COUNTY Groot lndustnes 1.353 s• 1.119 5~ 1.256.21 3, 739. 2Jp1 4! 1.682 35 ',57: 597C E 3:0:
IAKF COliNTY Ad•~nced D1sposa! Services. Waukoaan 102 7E 114.71 )16_3! 343. 205 6E 137 7: 681 870
:..-•11.!· COIJNTY l~K&SNJI'& Recycltng S>'Siems 20.1S H[Ol! 182< 54~
l~\xt COI.INTY Woste Inc AniiOC'I 1.5238< 121M_()( 1.2498( ~ ~ _Mll_Q(
..Ai<E COUNT 1509::i 113 9 1 11aa:; Jale! 4Q<l!" 31Z-9E ~091 1 :o: !<f,:
LAKE COUNTY TAL 3,160.99 2,648.29 2,769.2~ 8,5711.6~ ~ 5,1>06.08 21,0T. 20,20( 20.06(]
TOTALS 11,z~· 1~.~a11.: rl.64 13Z,07l 13.44: 133,780
Uuhzlllg Reeycln;~ Carts
Solid Waste Agency of Lake Courty
Municipal Recycling Summary
3rd Quarter 2015
(as reported by houlen}
3rd Qtr 2nd Qtr 1st Qtr [1st · 3rd !1st · 3rd 1st • 3rd
Jut Sep
MUNICIPALITY SERVICE PROVIDER
1016
Aug
2015 2015
2015 2015 2015 latr 151Qtr 201~ Qtr 113
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL ! TOTAL . TOTAL
IANTIOCH* Waste AhnAnAmAnt . Inc. Antioch 93.4~ 86.80 85.2~ 265.40 295.40 148.80 810 95E 959
18. Recycling Sys_teJTts 7.~ 11.22 10.50 29.61 29.~ 20.75 8' 57 36
~~r~~-rru:~-~E:==3E~Advanw~.~st~..'Oi~GSPO~ro a lt'~, ~Sned~" "rvice"~·tcr.-·~.i~=~~a·n~~~~D2~!2.'~ ~ 174.~
IBEACH PARK'
..
rAt 02.24
..
~ ~ OS 64:
64 51
:r~ 2!~
_3~8
IDEERFJELD' Waste Inc. Wheeling 204.0$ 183. 232.70 620,16 6:!4. .17 1.796 1, 17! 1,952
:oeeR PARK' Groot 2i .52 26. 32.80 87.18 119. 1,60 _316 159 361
FOX LAKE' Waste , Inc. Antioch 77.50 67.1 67.70 213.10 21)7. 14.70 55! 646 639
''~'"'"'" "'"'' Waste .Inc. Anlioch 162.5C 153. 164.8C 480.7C 490. 466.4C 1.431 1.72~ .74
tiRJ\YSLAKE Drop-Off \'\'aste , Inc. Mti<"'h 8.1C 6.52 6.1 20.7G 18.3( _12.80 5< 5! 50
3RAYSLAKE' TOTAL 17ll.61l 159.92 170.97 50U9 508.5<: 479.20 1A89 1.779 1,791
:me_gN ()AKS' Groot 4i .23 ~.62 45.84 137. o9 98.61 ..1.1Q..82 347 438 453
3URNEE" Waste Inc. Antioch 21· . JQ 204.6~ 209.10 628. 659.3t 579.7C 1,867 2,21! 2,259
Disposal Service&. 211.46 2_1.6S 28.32 76.46 71.01 _!1.5~ 209 lli 1!15
-IAWTHORNWOODS" WastE ~naaement.lnc. ~'heellr1g 111.69 94.09 103.51 309.36 327.7 286. 924 953 969
HIGHLAND PARK• soosal Services. 401.7! 379.54 403.2i 1.184.56 1.224.0• 1.0l 3.445 3.384 3.417
HIGHWOOD' sposal Services. ~orthbrook 44.27 39.36 45.0: 128.61 89.0• 307 276 284
ISLAND LAKE' Vast . Inc. mtloc 76.70 6i .3Q 71.31 215.3~ 221.31 21 65: rs7 761
mnFI"R' V raste Inc. VI 'heeling 57.30 41.39 57.26 155.9! 148.4' 1l 441 ~~ 450
.AKE Vaste . Inc. mtloch 55.30 45.10 51.00 151.4Q 157.6' 109 60 419 480 48:
I.AKI BLUFf' _§_root lndusl'!es 72.71 77.34 jl~_.'l_!i 234.11 242.8! _1_MJI4: 666 72_~ ]_3t
LAKE BLuff Orop-011 Gtoot -1duslrlel 6.84 6.04 5.53 16 1! 17.7! 14.81! 51 45 5~
.AKE BLUFF" rAI 79.35 83.3-4 89.68 252.37 260.60 203.5<1 717 r7: ras
.AK FOREST• Munl~inAI 239.71 257.44 242.69 73 .84 796.7! 677.71 2,214 2, !05 2.289
.AK E VILI,A,' W~!i~. . Inc. Antioch 51.1 42.80 49.30 14 1.20 ~ 1_15.60 422 l87 394
.AK ZURiCH" Waste , Inc. Wheeling 207.3~ 188.22 2B2.71 59 .32 688. 609.1 1.896 1, 11· 1,986
.ltlt:IVI!.LE' Groot 201.2: 179.46 195.81 57• .49 605. 511.59 1.694 1. 137 1.794
.JNCOLNSHIRE' Wa&te , Inc. Wheeling 82.41 60.62 87.70 230.73 198. 175.1! 605 '59 700
.INDENHURST' Groot 124.62 151.1: 18.44 394.2~ 408. 358 1,161 181 1.186
.ONG GROVE' Waste . Inc. Wheeling 90.51 9~44 11.5;1 266.4S 304. 251.31 822 tn _742
IMUNOELEIN' Groot lntt11drj<>• 267.69 226.87 246.7~ 741.30 756.5~ 644.0: 2,142 2, 2,246
:~~~;~ UN Pra:!":oisposai&R;~-:~:Ces ._2_.'1_() ~ 11.1>- ;~-:~ 103. 288 378
IGLNTC Housin~· TOTAL 39.941 24.65 24.101 88.69 99.51 99.16 287 308 192
IPARK CIW' Groot 9.681 10.93 8.661 29.27 ~IP9 24.88 82 84 83
PORT I Waste .Inc. Antioch 9.801 7.n . 17.5t 29. 23.6C 70 liB 95
PORT B,ol,!iR.tNGTON' Pra1retond OISDosal & Recvdlna S4trvices 2:!.3!
PORT BARfur"':t Ul''f TOTAL 9.8~ 7.7~ 2~.38 39.88 29. - ~3_&0 92 98 95
RIV "~"ch. 1Svstems 13.04 49.7~ 58.92 161.61 160. 122.75 ~~ 407 297
ROUND LAKE' Was~ Inc. A_n~'h 1'17.90 110.2~ 12.'3.30 351.41 381.90 344.00 1,07' 1,25! _1,_259
ROUND LAK • BEACH"
ROUND LAK . HEo"'r
ROUND lAKE PARK'
Waste
Groot
Advanced DisPOsal ~5
Inc. Antioch
Waukegan
1113.20
!0.17
160.4C
~
163.00
15.81
506.61
51.4' Mt
531.10 461.30
44.54
1,49S
147
1,7 1,804
181
25
ROUNI: I.AKE PARK· Groot lncluslries 41 .7< 29.81 37.1~ t08.7< 100.67 74.$1 284 24e
r~OL II) LI\Kf PARK' Wa¥1e . Inc. AntoOch 21.8[ 18.41 1131: 61 .6C 67.50 73.60 20~ 247 21(
ROt -AKE PARK' T rAL 63.5: 48.21 511.49 170.22 168.1~ 148.41 487 51: 48:
rHIF D LAKE' Waste . Inc. Antioch 9.80 LED 9.40 26.80 26.60 .1L_5!l 81 9E 98
rO'I\ cR LI1KES' Waste . Inc. Anlioch 9.8C A 18.70 27.1 27.0D 7< 97 9(
T0X_J!:RJ r.Kt: s· Pratreland D1soosa1 & Recvcllna Services 9. Q
rOWER LAKES• TOTAL 9.80 8.91 9. 27.92 27.11 27.00 82 97 99
HILLS' DISPOsal Servlcts. 163.22 191.7: 19: 548.7i 581 502.18 1.63: 1.550 1.598
IVOLO' Groot lnrluatri<>ot 36.20 -'5.5 34. 116.18 116.3' 97.8~ 330
TH' Groot lrodusllies 2!1.1~ 22.91: 25. _77.71 61.4: 56.21 ~~ 24~1 2
wasta .klc. Antioch 070 0,7( 0.7( 2.1D 2.2<l _2,00 E
Pr111reland Oi~P0511l & Recvclina Services c
Lakas Disposal 2.9C 2.9C 2 90 8.70 8.50 8.90 2~
Advanced Oioposal Services. Wauke~~en 6.2~ 5.9E 8.10 18.32 11.87 9.5! 4C
IWAOSWORTH" ITAL 38.98 32.56 15.29 106.83 83.99 r4. 256 2' 273
!WAUCONDA' Waste """""""'"""t Inc. Antioch 85.10 76.60 •.70 247.4C 254.00 215.70 717 a: 817
!WAUKEGAN" SDosaJ Services. 434.80 415.69 4: .59 1. !79.08 1.203.1! 951.H 3.4: 2.7' 1.812
!WINTHROP >root Industries 59.7~ 46.31 r.~ 153.4S 153.54 138.66 446 459 450
.suosal Service&. ..~. 119. 127.22 13: .20 380.1: 369.97 305.0~ 1,055 853 595
Gtoot Industries 251 11 ~ 248.~ 713.4( 519.3e ~7 .0! 1.68C 1.361: . 1_ .48~
AKe I~OUI-ITY Advanced Oisposfll Service5. Waukeoan 12 5; 13m 14.37 40.0:0 27.05 16.4! &4
-6_K( t;OUNTY Lakeshore Recvclina Svstema 5. 8.Q2 '.3C 1~ 1'
. AKE COUNT\' W&sle .lnc..AnHOch 2~.10 225.40
215.11 674.6C 660.11 630.1( 1,96f
..1\l(~COUNlY waste .Inc. WheoHna 48.48 .1• 41.50 131.14 142.37 1290: 4D 41 «~
IJ,.~.!5£COUNTY TOTAL 552.16 ~ ~ 537.51 1,578.25 1,3n..H J~~PO 4,170 4. 179 4.355
roTALS 5,155.65 4,75 i,Si 15,057.99 14,969.19 15,041.54 12,905.9~ 42,91: 44,828 42,966
"'"' ""'~u· i UUIIzlng Recycling Carts
Memo to the Bnnrd of Directors January 21,2016
I- 3. HCW Program llpdate
BACKGROUND: The following information summarizes the Household Chemical
Waste ( IICW) Program for the second half of FY 2015. The demand for the HCW program
remains strong showing increases in both participation volumes and v-..-aste volumes.
The Pharnui<.:Clltical Segregatiou program, which sta1ted up in February, continues to
grow. As of December 17'11 • :2015. we have conducted twelve Pharmaceutical Segregation
"events" at our faci lily Cl)llccting approximately 11.000 pounds of pharmuceuticals. The attached
chart shows the pm1it:ipating municipal police depa11ments. the total pounds of pharmaceuticals
delivered. the total volume of Schedule 2 controlled substances (i.e. pain killers/opiates) and the
corresponding street value (est. $750,000).
The li.lllowing tables summarize the results of HCW events conducted from July 1"1 thru
Non:mbcr 30111 • Also included is a tab!~ for the Pharmaceutical Segregation Program.
r--~~~--- -·--------·-·---------:-:-----------,
Deerfield- High School- July 18th
--------~----~----~--.----~--~----------
Item 2015 Results 2013 Results Difference
I• -::-:-:-:--::--'-:::-':-'-'.:....__--;---;-:----j----'-"-:':"':-::~'-:::"-~--~-__.;..c---=-":-:"-~~;.,__-+-....::....:.::-':'-::-'----'----l
J Vehick·s/Households 763/837 548/593 + 215 cars
DeerficldResidents 279(37%) 217(40%) +61residcnts j
L . ._. 1' Timers
1
1 305 (40%) 193 (35%) + 112
I Lake Forest- Municipal Services Center- October 17111
I
It.em 2015 Results 2014 Results Difference
I Vehic les/l·louseholds 748/802 525/548 + 223 cars
I
Lake Forest Resich:nts 223 (30%) 200 (38%) + 23 residents
I
L !"Timers 269 (36%) 226 (43%) + 43
undelein- 111
--- Metra Train Station- November 7
m ----
ouseholds
- 2015 Results i 2014 Results
797/8'26
Difference
80'2/843 - 5 cars
Residents
Mundelein --- 348 (44%) 308 (38%) + 40 residents
1'1 Ti -mers -~·--·~~3 (33%) '230 (29%) + 33
--------
I
ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS: Pharmaceutical Segregation Table
STAFF: Steve Nelson, Household Chemical Waste Engineer