When Ed Burke introduced a comprehensive recycling ordinance back in February, the bill looked like a sure winner. By introducing a recycling ordinance shortly before Earth Day, the 14th Ward alderman created a perfect opportunity to put his personal clout as City Council floor leader and finance committee chairman behind an issue with wide popular appeal.
Burke’s bill complements an earlier recycling ordinance introduced by 44th Ward Alderman Bernie Hansen. The Hansen bill, which passed on February 28, covers the first stage of the recycling process, requiring the city to set up collection systems in all 50 wards by 1993. Collecting paper, metal, glass, and other material that has potential value is certainly a good idea. But to complete the cycle, someone has to be willing and able to turn the old stuff into something that can be sold to a new consumer. Burke’s bill, which mandates recycled content for certain products sold within the city limits, would help create a steady stream of buyers for “raw” recycled material.
In addition, recyclers question whether a bottle bill is necessary now that the city is poised–thanks to the Hansen ordinance–to begin recycling service on a citywide basis. Bottles and cans, they think, can be captured most easily with a combination of curbside collection programs and convenient neighborhood drop-off centers. “We’re not saying we have to oppose the bill for the sake of our survival, although our survival will be difficult.” says Ken Dunn, founder and director of the Resource Center. “What we’re saying is, why go to a partial solution when we’re close to a comprehensive system?”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Environmental lobbyists–as distinct from the hands-on ecologists who actually run recycling programs–like the idea of a bottle bill, but they don’t want recycling programs to get crippled in the process. “Some of us think that bottle bills are a good approach,” says Kevin Greene of Citizens for a Better Environment. “But we understand the concerns of the nonprofit recyclers. The city should have a stronger commitment to helping the nonprofits.”
Sitting in the center of this situation is Ed Burke, who called the initial meeting of his recycling task force at City Hall on the morning of May 24. No actual work was accomplished at the session, but it did provide a press opportunity for Burke, who read a prepared statement to reporters. In a natty suit, sporting a shirt with monogrammed cuffs, and displaying the obligatory aldermanic pinky ring on his left hand, he seemed a bit out of place in the role of environmental champion in the City Council.
Burke’s campaign fund, which had more than $500,000 in it as of February, doesn’t need much fattening. He will be up for reelection for his sixth full term, and he hasn’t faced an opponent from his own ward since 1971. Burke probably doesn’t need much help getting reelected alderman, but he has been a regular seeker of higher office, having launched unsuccessful campaigns for state’s attorney, Congress, mayor, and county board president. A streak of Irish green was once a key credential for a Chicago political career; Burke may be adjusting to modern times by trying to use a tinge of environmental green to soften his image. “There’s a lot of political currency to be gained in being a politician who calls himself an environmentalist,” says Sharon Pines of Greenpeace. She and others are concerned that Burke’s conversion to the environmental cause may be geared more toward gaining favorable publicity than toward accomplishing substantive reforms.
