We need clear tally of recycling progress
It's difficult to plan a journey if you don't know where you are.
So if state and county officials hope to guide along the path to a more effective recycling program, they need to arm themselves with the facts about how well it's going.
To that end, state officials must heed the advice in an audit that questions the Health Department's oversight of the "HI-5" program. State Auditor Marion Higa last week delivered a 72-page lashing of the recycling redemption program through which consumers can recoup revenue paid as deposits on beverage containers.
Her criticism was focused on two principal weaknesses:
The two problems are related, of course. Under pressure to speed the lines through the redemption centers, the operators from Reynolds Recycling understandably relaxed their checks of container counts claimed by the consumers. Auditors found that, in most cases, consumers were able to get away with inflated claims.
Health officials have pledged to keep better tabs on the system with increased field inspections — a minimum requirement, one would think.
Operations would be further improved if state lawmakers would compel retailers to do their part, as well. A proposal to require major beverage retailers to join the roster of redemption centers should be shepherded through the Legislature this session.
Based on the state's accounting of its redemption program, city officials have maintained that municipal funds and energy would be better spent on an initiative to boost the recycling of yard waste at residential curbs than on smoothing the kinks in a proposed curbside bottle-and-can recycling plan.
Green waste recycling makes good sense because it will nurture a budding industry around the production and sale of compost and mulch. It will also reduce the waste stream that is either burned or dumped into shrinking landfills.
But it's far too soon to deep-six curbside recycling, especially before the state recyclers finish double-checking their numbers.
