SR-506-003-011 (6)
. . . 1/41
,
, JUN 2 0 1989
s06-003-O/(
f
GS:CP:recycle Santa Monica, California
Council Meeting: June 20, 1989
To: Mayor and City council
From: city Staff
Subject: Recommendation to Approve New Refuse Rates and Expand the
city's Recycling Programs
INTRODUCTION
This report evaluates the present financial status of the city's
Refuse Fund and discusses various recycling program enhancements
which are recommended to be implemented over the next two years.
A refuse rate increase proposal sufficient to cover the on-going
expenditure needs of current operations as well as finance the
program enhancements is presented for Council consideration and
approval. A City Council Information Item which contains a more
in-depth discussion of the proposed comprehensive solid waste
management plan and the set of recommended recycling enhancements
ia attached for reference.
BACKGROUND
Santa Monica's solid waste operation is a self-supporting
enterprise, generating virtually all of its revenues from the fees
charged to residential property owners and businesses in the city.
The City provides refuse collection service to all Santa Monica
1 II-A
JUN 2 0 1989
. .
. residents and approximately 50 percent of commercial/industrial
establishments. The Refuse Fund operation also provides street
sweeping service on almost all residential and commercial streets
in the City and operates a Household Hazardous Waste Collection
Center. In FY1988-89, it is projected that Santa Monica will
collect and dispose of approximately 96,000 tons of refuse. Over
the last nine years, the amount of solid waste collected by City
crews has grown an average of 3.5 percent per year. Refuse rates
were last increased in May, 1987.
DISCUSSION
Assuming continuation of the current maintenance of effort in the
Refuse Fund and without a rate increase, it is projected that a
shortfall of approximately $.5 million would be experienced at the
end of FY1989-90 growing to about $2.0 million at the end of
FY1990-91. The primary reasons for this projected shortfall are
increases in salaries and wages I higher landfill tipping fees,
increases in vehicle and worker's compensation insurance, and
impacts from general inflation. Over the past two years, various
program costs have ei ther been reduced or deferred in order to
delay for as long as possible the need for further rate increases.
In order to pay for increased costs over the next two years as
described above, a refuse rate increase of 18 percent is necessary
effective July ~, 1989.
Proaram Enhancements
2
. .
. In conjunction with the adoption of a comprehensive solid waste
management plan which has as its goal the diversion of 25 percent
of the City's total solid waste stream over the next four years,
it is proposed that various recycling program enhancements be
approved for the next two years. The total two year net cost of
these enhancements is estimated at $961,000, which would require
an additional 8 percent increase in refuse fees. This results in
a total recommended rate increase of 26 percent effective July 1,
1989. The specific components of the recommended enhancements are
described below, and the estimated costs associated with each
enhancement are detailed in Exhibit I.
Automated Collection in sinqle Family Zones - Implementation
of a system of automated collection vehicles and standardized
refuse containers in single family zones in conjunction with
a conversion from the present twice weekly refuse collection
to once weekly refuse collection and once weekly recycling
collection. Automated collection will result in long-term
operating efficiencies and will allow a future restructuring
of refuse rates in these zones to a "fee-for-volumeU system
which charges customers based on the number and size of the
refuse containers Which they use.
Multi-Familv Buildina RecvclinCf PrOCframs - Expansion of
recycling opportunities in multi-family buildings through the
implementation of two pilot programs which would increase the
3
. .
convenience to potential recycling participants by locating
recycling collection containers on each building site. One of
the proposed pilot programs will entail a new system to
collect commingled recyclables for transport to a central
sorting and processing facility. The hiring of a new Marketing
Specialist position in the next fiscal year is also
reco!l\In.ended to ensure the ultimate success of the city's
expanded recycling and waste diversion efforts.
Special studies and Other Proqrams - The consultant studies
which are recommended include a feasibility analysis of
municipal composting and a detailed waste characterization
study, as well as a refuse rate equity analysis which would
serve as the basis for a new fee-for-waste-volume rate
structure. The establishment of 20 additional recycling drop-
off zones in public (schools and shopping centers) and private
parking lots is also proposed.
It is estimated that after implementation of these program
enhancements, the City will experience cost savings from greater
operating efficiencies and increased revenues which when taken
together should total about $130,000 per year. Long term benefits
from these recycling programs include avoided landfill hauling and
disposal costs and environmental benefits. It should be noted that
these costs do not include implementation of a yard waste
composting program which may be the single most effective means of
4
. .
reducing the City's solid waste stream. Once the proposed
composting feasibility study is complete, staff will return to
Council with specific recommendations regarding a municipal
composting effort.
BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT
The 26 percent refuse rate increase outlined above would result in
approximately $1.5 million in additional annual revenues for the
Refuse Fund. The first year costs of the enhancements which are
recommended would require an additional appropriation of $527,000
over the amounts presented in the Proposed 1989-90 Budget for the
Refuse Fund. Assuming implementation of the proposed rate increase
by July 1, 1989, the FY1989-90 ending fund balance for the Refuse
Fund is projected at $.4 million. The ending fund balance estimate
for the Refuse Fund contained in the Proposed Budget does not match
this amount as the Proposed Budget used an estimated rate increase
assumption based on information available at that time. The impact
of the proposed 26 percent rate increase in various types of
occupancies is presented in Exhibit II and in the attached
resolution.
RECOMMENDATIONS
staff respectfully recommends that City Council approve the
following recommendations.
1- Conceptually approve the comprehensive solid waste management
5
. .
. plan outlined in the attached Council Information Item,
including the establishment of a 25 percent solid waste
diversion goal for the city.
2. Adopt the attached resolution to increase refuse rates
effective July 1, 1989.
Prepared by: stan Scholl, Director of General Services
Neil Miller, Maintenance Manager
Craig Perkins, Administrative Services Manager
Hope Smith, Senior Administrative Analyst
Susan Munves, Administrative Analyst
Attachments
6
. .
EXHIBIT I
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED COSTS/BENEFITS
OF RECYCLING ENHANCEMENTS OVER
NEXT TWO YEARS
Proposed Enhancement Cost Impact Cost Impact
FY1989-90 FY1990-91
AUTOMATED COLLECTION IN SINGLE FAMILY ZONES:
2 Automated Collection Vehicles
($150,000 each~ $100,000 drawn
from already proposed ClP project) $ 200,000 0
Automated Collection containers
(assumes lease/purchase over 5
years; $400,000 total @ 10%
interest~ $50,000 additional
down payment in first year) 152,000 102,000
Public Information and
Community Outreach for single
family automated collection
(Mailings, flyers, brochures,
advertising, etc. ) 25{000 10,000
AUTOMATED COLLECTION SUBTOTAL $ 377,000 $112,000
SPECIAL STUDIES AND OTHER PROGRAMS:
CompostingjWaste Characterization
Study (Professional Services) $ 40,000 0
Refuse Rate Consultant Analysis
(to correct present inequities
and create a fee-for-volume rate
structure) 20,000 0
20 Additional Recycling Drop-Off
Zones in public and private parking
lots (20 @ $1,250) 25,000 0
OTHER COSTS SUBTOTAL $ 85,000 0
MULTI-FAMILY RECYCLING PROGRAMS:
New Marketing Specialist/
Administrative Analyst position
(assumes hiring by October 1989 ) 45,000 50,000
7
. .
2 New Recycling Collectors
(assumes hiring by October 1990) 0 57,000
Additional Collection Vehicle
(for multi-family collection) 0 120,000
customized Collection Containers
(for commingled and source separated
materials) 0 95,000
Central Sorting Facility
(may be contracted) 0 50,000
2 FTE As-Needed Recycling Workers
for Sorting Facility (may be contracted;
assumes hiring by October 1990) 0 38,000
Additional Single Family and
MUlti-Family Individual Household
Collection Containers 10,000 20,000
Public Education/Marketing
of enhanced recycling program
in mUlti-family and commercial
occupancies. 10,000 25,000
MULTI-FAMILY SUBTOTAL $ 65,000 455,000
GROSS TOTAL COSTS 527,000 567,000
LESS:
savings from Reduced Operating Costs
of Automated Collection (Assumes full
implementation in 1990-91) 0 80,000
Avoided Disposal Costs
(1,000 tons at $28/ton) 0 28,000
Sale of Recyclables
(1,000 tons at $25/ton) 0 25,000
SAVINGS/REVENUES SUBTOTAL 0 $ 133,000
NET TOTAL COSTS $ 527,000 $ 434,000
8
. .
EXHIBIT II
Refuse Rates in various comparison Citie~
commercial Commercial
City Single Family Multi-Family(l) 1 Bin/2 wk. 1 Bin/6 wk.
Beverly N/A(2) N/A (3) $71.00(4) $165.00(4)
Hills
Culver
City $ 8.62 $129.03 85.66 256.98
Glendale 6.60 58.00 58.95 160.35
Pasadena (5) 17.50(6) 106.70 77.06 173.24
Torrance (7) 9.75 19.50(8) N/A(9) N/A(9)
(duplex)
Santa Monica 11.61 75.51 53.03 159.02
(current)
Santa Monica 14.63 95.20 66.82 200.37
(includes 26% increase eff. 7-1-89)
Santa Monica collects refuse from single-family residences twice
weekly, whereas all other cities listed above make collections
from single-family residences once/week. Further, Santa Monica
charges all customers for both street sweeping and recycling
services. with the exception of Pasadena's recycling program,
none of the cities listed include charges for these additional
services in the refuse fees.
FOOTNOTES
(1) Represents charge for ten units unless noted otherwise.
(2) Residential refuse collection is supported by General Fund
Revenues.
(3) Treated as commercial account if bins are used.
(4) 7-1-89 rate increase is anticipated.
(5) A commercial rate increase of about 20% is pending. The
last general rate increase was 11-1-88. Also, three cubic
yard bins are used instead of two cubic yard bins.
(6) A pilot automated curbside collection program began
10-10-88.
9
- - - -----
. .
(7) The last rate increase was 7-1-88.
(8) Torrance collects refuse from single-family residences and
duplexes only. Private haulers provide other collection
services.
(9) Available from private haulers only.
10
. .
RESOLUTION NO.
(CITY COUNCIL SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA MONICA REVISING FEES CHARGED FOR
GENERAL CITY SANITATION SERVICES, SANITATION
BIN RENTAL AND ROLL-OUT SERVICES
WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section 5233 allows fees for
general city sanitatlon services to be set by resolution: and
WHEREAS, Municlpal Code Section 5228D allows fees for
City sanitation bin rental and roll-out fees to be set by
resolution; and
WHEREAS, a study has determined the need to increase
all sanitation fees so that the City can recover its costs for
provlding sanitation services;
WHEREAS, it is in the best long-term interest of the
City to adopt a comprehensive sol id waste management plan wi th
enhanced recycling and waste reduction programs: and
WHEREAS, the fees established by this Resolution are no
more than necessary to recover the costs of the services
provided,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION l. The charges for sanitation service, as
provided for in Munlcipal Code Section 5233, shall be as follows:
Type of Service Monthly Charqe
Residential Single Family $ 14.63 per unit
- 28 -
. .
,
MUlti-Family
Apartments, 2-50 units $ 7.40 per unit
Apartments, 51-100 units $ 6.73 per unit
Apartments, 100 or more units $ 6.22 per unit
Boarding Houses, Sleeping Rooms $ 6.22
and Miscellaneous Services
Water Accounts Not using City
Refuse Service $ 9.74
Business and Commercial Customers
without Approved Bins
Twice Weekly $ 30.00 per 1/2 cubic yard
Three Times Weekly $ 44.96 per 1/2 cubic yard
Six Times Weekly $ 89.93 per 1/2 cubic yard
Business and Commercial Customers
Using 2 Yard Bins
Twice Weekly $ 66.82
Three Times Weekly $100.18
six Times Weekly $200.37
SECTION 2. The fees for bin rental from the City, as
provided for in Municipal Code Section 52280, shall be as
follows:
Frequency of Collection
Type of Bin Twice weekly 6 Times Weekly
2 cubic yard $10.60/month $31. 78/month
SECTION 3. The fees for roll-out charges, as provided
for in Municipal Code section 52280, shall be as follows:
Twice Weekly Co1lectlon $14.97/month
Six Times Weekly Collection $44.70/month
SECTION 4. The fees which are established by this
Resolution shall become effective on July 1. 1989.
SECTION 5. Upon the effective date of this Resolution,
all Resolutions of the City CounCll of the City of Santa Monica
inconsistent with the provislons of this Resolution, to the
- 29 -
. .
.
extent of such inconsistencies only and no further, are repealed
or modified to the extent necessary to affect the provisions of
this Resolution.
SECTION 6. The city Clerk shall certify to the
adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the
same shall be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~ ~.
ROBERT M. MYERS
City Attorney
- 30 -
. ~UIAeA!TA.. L
,
506-003-0// W
GS:SS:NM:sm:swmnotes June 15, 1989 "-A
JUN 2 0 1989
INFORMATION ITEM
TO: Mayor and city Council
FROM: City staff
SUBJECT: Discussion of a Proposed Comprehensive Solid Waste
Management Plan for the City of Santa Monica
INTRODUCTION
Solid waste management has become an increasingly critical
environmental issue. The traditional approaches to municipal
solid waste must be reevaluated so that long term environmental
goals receive as much emphasis as short term collection and
disposal requirements. Alternative solid waste management
policies such as recycling, composting, and waste minimization
are becoming a more cost-effective means of dealing with the
solid waste problem and can no longer be considered as
discretionary components of our solid waste management efforts.
The importance of alternative Solid Waste Management strategies
is particularly evident when the many indirect costs associated
with traditional refuse disposal are considered; e.g., cost of
toxic materials cleanup, landfill opening, operation and closure
costs, cost of noise and air pollution resulting from
transportation of solid waste to distant landfills, costs
associated with the cleanup of litter on our streets and beaches,
and the benefits to be gained from reducing our reliance on
virgin natural resources. ~~
10
- 1 - ,I-A
JUN 2 0 1989
. .
Development of a comprehensive solid waste management plan for
the City of Santa Monica is an essential endeavor which may, in
fact, soon be mandated by State legislation. without such a
plan, the City will be unprepared to face a future landfill
crisis which will produce a dramatic increase in landfill fees.
This report outlines the recommended strategies for the creation
of a solid waste management plan, defines the basis for the
establishment of a 25 percent solid waste diversion goal for the
City over the next four years, and describes several other
actions aimed at achieving desirable solid waste policy changes
at other levels of government.
This report is the result of the efforts of an inter-departmental
Solid Waste Task Force which included representatives from the
City Attorney's Office, Rent Control, Community and Economic
Development, Cultural and Recreation Services, General Services,
and the City Manager's Office. The report also represents
extensive discussions with solid waste management experts from
both the public and private sector.
BACKGROUND
Solid Waste Disposal
Santa Monica's solid waste operation is a self-supporting
enterprise, generating virtually all its revenues from the fees
charged to residential property owners and businesses in the
City. The City provides trash collection services to all Santa
Monica residences and approximately 50 percent of
commercial/industrial establishments. six private contractors
provide service to the remaining commercial/industrial accounts.
- 2 -
. .
Some of these private haulers pay the City competitive rates to
dump at the City's transfer station.
In FY1987-88, the City hauled a total of 92,441 tons of solid
waste to landfills. Over the last nine years, the amount of
solid waste hauled by the City of Santa Monica to landfills has
increased an average of 3.5 percent per year. This increase is
primarily due to population growth and increasingly wasteful
packaging techniques, and has occured despite our current
recycling efforts.
From 1952 to 1958, Santa Monica incinerated its solid waste at a
facility at the City Yards. The incinerator was closed in 1959
by order of the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District. In
1960, Santa Monica replaced the incinerator with a refuse
transfer station and began hauling waste to Mission Canyon
landfill located in the Sepulveda Pass. This transfer station
greatly reduces the number of refuse trucks traveling on the
freeway and increases the cost-effectiveness of Santa Monica's
solid waste operation. In 1979, residents living near Mission
Canyon successfully lobbied the Los Angeles city council to
close the landfill. Since that time, Santa Monica has been
hauling its solid waste to Sunshine Canyon landfill located in
Sylmar, 28 miles from Santa Monica.
It is projected that the Sunshine Canyon landfill will reach its
capacity in 1990 if expansion permits are not granted by Los
Angeles County to its current owners. If Sunshine canyon does
- 3 -
. .
not receive an expansion permit, Santa Monica will be forced to
haul its trash to a more distant landfill site.
Santa Monica is fortunate to pay a low tipping fee at the
landfill which is currently $189 per trailer (approximately $9.80
per ton) . Landfill fees range up to $150 per ton in the eastern
United states and up to $40 per ton in other parts of California.
Tipping fees will increase an estimated 20 percent effective July
1, 1989, raising the City's cost per ton to $11.43. No landfill
will offer the City a contract term longer than one year due to
the uncertainty of their status and the likelihood of increased
demand for their services. The projected landfill disposal fee
as of July 1, 1989 represents approximately 20 percent of the
total costs of the City's solid waste management operation.
Although Santa Monica's resident population is fairly stable, its
daytime working, tourist, and visitor population should continue
to grow. New office developments and hotels in process or under
construction will impact the amount of refuse produced and
require recycling programs aimed at mitigating their impacts. It
is projected that the total tonnage of solid waste transported by
Santa Monica to the landfill will reach 96,000 tons in FY1988-89
and 97,000 tons in FY 1989-90.
Recyclinq
Santa Monica's recycling program was established in 1981 as a
part of the refuse operation of the General Services Department.
The program is based on drop-off zones for multi-family areas,
curbside collection for single family areas, and a central
- 4 -
. .
buyback center for those who wish to sell their recyclables.
This current combination of curbside collection and strategically
located drop-off zones is estimated to elicit the participation
of approximately 30 percent of Santa Monica residents. Even with
this high participation rate when compared to the experience of
many other cities with recycling programs, Santa Monica's
recycling program has thus far been able to achieve only a 2.6
percent diversion of the total waste stream collected by City
crews, or about a 2.0 percent diversion of the city's total waste
stream. The City's privately-operated buyback center is
estimated to divert an additional 3.5 percent of the city's waste
stream. This buyback center, located at the city Yards, is
operated under contract with the city of Santa Monica by
Ecolo-Haul, a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc. Ecolo-Haul
buys all of Santa Monica's collected recyclables and is
responsible for their sale to secondary material brokers. It is
estimated that other private recycling programs and scavengers
may divert up to an additional 5 percent of the waste stream.
Therefore, the current waste stream diversion by all recycling
efforts in the City may be as much as 9.5 percent.
In general, no recycling program directlY recovers its costs
through sales to secondary material brokers. Recycling markets
depend on the fluctuating cost of commodities and are very
volatile. For example, the amount of recyclables collected by
the city had been fairly constant at approximately 2,000 tons per
year until recently when the price for recycled newspapers
declined, resulting in a decrease in scavenging and an increase
- 5 -
. .
in the amount of newspaper left in the City's bins. However,
during the same period scavenging increased for metal and glass
recyclables due to the influence of market prices. The long term
benefits from recycling programs are in avoided landfill disposal
costs, environmental benefits, and numerous other direct and
indirect benefits.
DISCUSSION
Current proposals in the state legislature would mandate
municipalities to create an integrated waste management plan
which must contain various waste reduction strategies. This
report proposes that Santa Monica adopt such a balanced approach
to solid waste management by incorporating methods which reuse,
reclaim, and reduce waste as much as possible. The solid waste
disposal alternatives which are included in the proposed solid
waste management plan for the city are:
1. Waste reduction
2. Recycling
3. Composting
4. Landfilling.
Staff will also propose that the efficiency of the current refuse
collection and disposal operation be enhanced through the
implementation of an automated system on selected city refuse
routes. This automated system would not only incorporate
operational efficiencies but would lay the groundwork for a more
equitable refuse fee structure. Each of these planned elements
is discussed below.
- 6 -
-- ---
. .
WASTE REDUCTION
Waste reduction has as its goal the reduction of wastes generated
by the community through such actions as changes in product usage
and composition thereby lessening the amount of materials
entering the waste stream. Such changes can be accomplished
through legislation, modification of public attitudes, and
changes in procurement policies by business and government.
Legislative efforts must be accompanied by public education
efforts, which attempt to change public attitudes through
advertising, community outreach, and economic incentives.
Product packaqinq
Since 1960, the amount of discarded packaging materials has
increased over 80 percent. It now constitutes approximately
one-third of solid waste in the United states. While a great
amount of creative talent and dollars are aimed at devising
packaging that sells a product, virtually no effort is directed
at determining what happens to the packaging after it is sold.
Although wasteful packaging is a significant solid waste problem,
there is not a great deal which Santa Monica can do to reduce the
problem in the absence of broader state and federal action.
Procurement Policies
Developing markets for recycled products is a very critical
factor in making recycling work. CUrrently, approximately $600
billion per year or 20 percent of the nation's GNP represents
government procurement expenditures. The seven largest office
paper users in California are state agencies. Twenty-four states
- 7 -
. .
and seven local governments have already adopted procurement
legislation favoring recycled products. By revising the City's
procurement policies to mandate purchase of recycled materials,
Santa Monica would help to create additional markets for recycled
materials and set an example for other government agencies.
Santa Monica should also explore the establishment of joint
procurement policies with other cities in the region, thereby
fostering the development of broader markets for recycled
products.
In designing an effective procurement pOlicy, the city would have
to review existing purchasing specifications to eliminate
obstacles to purchasing recyc1ables, review product
specifications to eliminate unnecessarily stringent criteria,
establish minimum content standards, create a viable definition
for recycled materials, and encourage vendors to establish and
abide by similar purchasing programs.
Any additional or expanded City programs undertaken as described
above should be accompanied by lobbying efforts at the state and
federal levels to increase incentives for the adoption and
expansion of reCYCling programs, discourage the production of
non-recyclable and/or disposable products, improve markets for
secondary materials, and encourage use of reclaimed rather than
virgin materials in the production process.
RECYCLING
Recycling can be applied to residential, industrial, and
commercial materials after they become wastes. Santa Monica's
- 8 -
. .
present recycling program collects and markets glass, aluminum,
bi-metal, newspaper, white office paper, motor oil, and PET
beverage containers.
Multi-Family Recyclinq
The high percentage (about 80 percent) of multi-family dwellings
in Santa Monica presents a challenge to achieving a 25 percent
recycling goal. Almost all recycling programs found elsewhere in
the country are designed for single family areas.
It has been repeatedly demonstrated that the more convenient
recycling is made for residents, the higher the participation
rate will be. In Santa Monica, residents of multi-family
buildings deposit their recyclables in 100 drop-off zones located
throughout the city. Inconveniences may result from drop-off
zones located away from a building's refuse bins and by limited
space inside dwelling units for collection containers.
Staff proposes the implementation of two pilot programs designed
to generate increased participation and recycling volume in
mUlti-family zones. One program will entail the placement of
separate recycling collection containers alongside regular refuse
bins on multi-family sites with the agreement of the property
owner or building manager. The City will also provide specially-
designed individual collection containers to participating
multi-family residents to facilitate separation of their
recyclables.
In conjunction with this pilot program, staff will explore the
feasibility of providing rebates to property owners who provide
- 9 -
. .
space for the recycling containers. It is hoped that providing a
financial incentive will encourage property owners to participate
in this program, thereby resulting in increased recycling
convenience for residents of multi-family buildings.
The second pilot program proposed for multi-family zones involves
a different recycling approach. This approach will require
targeted mUlti-family buildings to separate all recyclables from
their nonrecyclable refuse. The commingled recyclables will then
be deposited in a separate compartment of the refuse bin to allow
collection and transport to a central sorting facility. There,
the commingled recyclables will be separated by material category
and sold through established market channels. This proposed
program has the potential for a higher success level than the
City's current recycling program in multi-family areas due to
increased ease of participation for residents. However, this
program will also require a higher level of investment by the
City for new customized collection bins, additional collection
vehicles, additional staff, and greater commitment of sorting
facility space at the City Yards.
It is proposed that the City'S initial commingled recycling
efforts be limited to a selected number of multi-family
buildings. Once data on program costs and program results are
available, decisions regarding expansion of the program can be
considered.
Sinqle Family Recyclinq
The City's current curbside collection program for single family
- 10 -
. .
and small mUlti-family residences has been more successful than
the City's multi-family program from the standpoint of resident
participation. It is proposed that the single family zone
efforts be expanded through additional public education and
community outreach and through investigation of a more efficient
recycling collection container design. simultaneous with the
continuation of the City's curbside collection of recyclables,
additional proposals dealing with separated yard waste collection
and a IIfee-for-waste-volume" rate structure are discussed below.
Public Information and Community Outreach
The proposed mUlti-family recycling programs as well as the other
proposed changes in solid waste collection and recycling
presented in this report will necessitate implementation of a
broad public information campaign to inform residents of the
benefits of participation. Outreach strategies will vary from
building to building, depending on factors such as size, type of
building, and type of onsite recycling implemented. Marketing of
the City's recycling and waste reduction programs must be
aggressively pursued if the proposed 25 percent waste diversion
goal is to be achieved.
Additional Drop-Off Zone Locations
It is proposed that another promising way to increase recycling
participation by employees and residents in the City is through
the establishment of additional recycling drop-off zones.
Logical locations for the placement of up to 25 additional
recycling drop-off zones include supermarket and other private
parking lots. The potential loss of parking spaces in these
- 11 -
-- - ---
. .
lots from the installation of drop-off zones must be evaluated
before the zones are established.
Participation by both public and private schools and colleges
through the approval of recycling drop-off zones in their parking
lots should also be encouraged. Placement of drop-off zones at
these institutions would provide an opportunity to reach and
educate young people about the value of recycling and help expand
recycling program participation.
Plastics Recycling
Beginning March 1, 1989, polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
beverage containers were added as one of the items which is
collected by the City's Recycling Program. At present, PET
containers are collected commingled with metal cans. ~e
feasibility of adding HOPE (high density polyethelene) plastic,
found in products such as milk jugs and juice bottles, is
currently being studied.
Plastics constitute an estimated 13 to 33 percent of solid waste
by volume, but only about 7 percent of solid waste by weight.
Volume is usually the more significant variable since it is
directly related to the lifespan of landfill space. More than
half of the discarded plastic derives from packaging. Plastic
packaging does not decompose and can produce toxic gases when
burned. Currently, only one percent of all plastics are
recycled, yet the use of plastic consumer items and plastic
packaging is rapidly increasing.
- 12 -
. .
Recent meetings organized by City staff with representatives from
the plastics industry have resulted in several proposals for
reducing the impact of polystyrene (styrofoam) litter on Santa
Monica streets and beaches and reducing the volume of plastics in
landfill wastes. At least one plastics recycler has agreed to
accept post-consumer (dirty) polystyrene for reprocessing. A
pilot polystyrene recycling program for a large fast food
restaurant in Santa Monica is also expected to be implemented by
this summer. Staff is working to develop a more comprehensive
polystyrene recycling program in cooperation with plastics
industry representatives and Santa Monica businesses. The
program which is envisioned would recycle a significant amount of
post-consumer and industrial polystyrene in the city.
At this time, staff believes that an effective polystyrene
recycling program is preferable to legislative action banning
polystyrene use since a polystyrene ban would very likely result
in the substitution of a packaging material which is not
recyclable. If polystyrene packaging were replaced with
"biodegradable" materials, serious questions would need to be
raised about how these degradable products will ultimately affect
the environment. Scientific evidence shows that most materials
expected to biodegrade in landfills are not in fact decomposing
or are releasing toxic substances into the air and ground during
the decomposition process. If staff's current discussions with
plastics industry representatives do not result in an
appropriately aggressive recycling program, the City should
reevaluate its strategy on the plastics packaging issue.
- 13 -
- -------- ---
. .
. Commercial and Industrial Recyclinq
The adoption of City policies to promote recycling in commercial
and industrial occupancies is made difficult by the fact that
only 50 percent of commercial refuse collection is currently
provided by the City. To achieve a 25 percent waste diversion
goal, it is important that City businesses and industries are
included in a comprehensive recycling program. At the same timet
however, the city must be careful not to diminish competitiveness
with private haulers. The approach which has been taken by the
City up to this point is to promote voluntary recycling efforts
for selected materials such as glass from restaurants and bars.
An alternative approach could involve the establishment of
specific recycling requirements for all businesses whether
collected by city or private refuse haulers. This alternative
entails a complex set of legal and logistical issues which would
need to be examined thoroughly prior to implementation.
Given the complexity surrounding commercial recycling, staff
proposes that the feasibility of commercial recycling
alternatives be studied during the next fiscal year so that
specific recommendations can be presented to city Council for
consideration. One of the work efforts which will be carried out
as a part of this feasibility analysis will include a detailed
waste characterization study to provide data on the proportion of
marketable components within the city's commercial/industrial
waste stream. staff will also continue discussions with small
and large businesses to elicit their support for current and
proposed voluntary recycling programs.
- 14 -
. .
Recyclinq Requirements for New Construction
General Services and Planning Division staff are developing a
proposed ordinance requiring all new developments which exceed a
specific size threshold to provide recycling systems and
operational recycling plans in their final development design.
It is anticipated that a staff report containing recommendations
on this issue will be presented to City Council within the next
60 days.
YARD WASTE COMPO STING
Yard waste composting is a solid waste reduction process applied
to organic materials in the waste stream. Through biological
action, these organic materials are converted into a usable soil
conditioner known as compost. The major advantage of composting
is that it can be accomplished through the application of a
relatively simple technology and that the compostable materials
(yard waste) can be easily separated from other solid waste. It
is estimated that a yard waste program in Santa Monica could
divert from 10 to 20 percent of the City's solid waste stream.
Diversion of yard waste through composting is probably the single
most important means by which the volume of materials hauled to
the landfill can be reduced. The success of such a program would
depend on identifying a suitable composting site and markets to
accept and use the material. Even if a market for the material
cannot be found, the composting process reduces volume and weight
of the waste by over 50 percent.
At present, no yard waste collected by the City's sanitation
crews is diverted from the landfill. A pilot composting facility
- 15 -
. .
was operated on Santa Monica Airport property between 1986 and
1988 and produced several hundred tons of compost from the Parks
and Cemetery Divisions' landscape waste and tree trimmings.
Given the tremendous potential benefits to be gained from
composting, City staff has begun an in-depth analysis of the
feasibility of reestablishing a composting facility in Santa
Monica.
Clearly, for a highly urbanized community such as Santa Monica,
composting is made more difficult because of siting constraints.
staff has identified potential sites for the establishment of a
composting facility which could provide adequate space for the
operation and allow mitigation of adverse impacts to neighborhood
residents and businesses. Two of these potential composting
sites are located on Santa Monica Airport property and the third
site could be established at the city Yard by relocating some
existing uses. staff also proposes to meet with representatives
of neighboring jurisdictions to examine the feasibility of a
shared composting facility located at a site outside of Santa
Monica.
Another problem associated with establishment of a composting
facility is development of a market for the composted material.
In an attempt to identify existing markets or creation of new
markets, staff has contacted soil amendment companies in the Los
Angeles area and has received a response from at least one of
these companies which is interested in using the finished compost
product from Santa Monica. It is critically important that a
market for the compost be identified prior to the establishment
- 16 -
. . .
of the facility since a significant investment would be required
for equipment and personnel at the compost facility, as well as
equipment and personnel to collect separated yard waste from
Santa Monica residents.
One option which is being investigated by City staff would
involve only a one-step processing of yard waste through a large
grinder. The resulting unfinished product could then be marketed
to established composting companies for final compost processing
at their site and inclusion in their marketed soil amendment
products. A grinder-only operation would require considerably
less space than a full composting facility.
Implementation of a composting program will also require a
partial restructuring of current refuse collection procedures.
For example, each single family house or multi-family building
would be required to separate their yard waste from the rest of
their refuse for collection and transport to the composting
facility. The current disposal practices for City-generated
landscape waste and tree trimming debris would also need to be
changed. These changes in the refuse collection operation would
involve additional initial costs for purchase of equipment and
hiring of additional staff. In the long run, however, these
additional investments would result in significant avoided
hauling costs and landfill disposal fees.
Since establishment of a composting facility involves significant
modifications to our current solid waste practices and presents a
complex set of siting issues, it is proposed that the services of
- 17 -
. .
a professional consultant be retained to assist and advise city
staff as to the most cost-effective means to pursue this
important objective.
LANDFILLING
For the forseeable future, landfilling will remain an essential
part of an integrated solid waste management plan. Current
regulations require landfills to provide daily cover, landfill
liners, leachate control, landfill gas collection systems, and
environmental monitoring.
Siting of landfills has become increasinglY difficult due to
opposition from surrounding residents, space requirements, and
environmental hazards. The State's Waste Management Board
estimates Los Angeles County will begin to experience the same
type of landfill crisis as has become commonplace in other states
during the last few years as existing landfills reach capacity
and siting of new landfills becomes more difficult. It is
estimated that most California cities will face closure of their
present landfills within the next 10 years. As a result, cities
will have few options but to implement alternative solid waste
management strategies.
INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF REFUSE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
A more efficient refuse collection and disposal system in single
family areas can be accomplished through implementation of
automated collection in conjunction with an increase in recycling
collection service from once every two weeks to once per week.
Many cities have implemented automated refuse collection, a
- 18 -
- ------- --
. .
system where the sanitation worker remains in the truck
.
throughout the collection process. Automated collection also has
the advantage of providing a means to offer financial recycling
incentives to single family and small multi-family buildings.
These financial incentives would be possible since the different
sizes of standardized containers which will be provided by the
City to residents as a part of automated collection service would
allow establishment of a "fee-for-volume" rate structure. This
fee-for-volume system will charge residents based on the size and
number of containers which they request. Rates would therefore
more closely reflect the actual waste disposal service which each
resident receives from the City.
Corollary benefits to the city from automated collection are
lowered operating costs resulting from increased efficiencies:
reduced injury hazard to employees; and a cleaner, more efficient
collection process. Currently, three single family refuse
collection routes service 4,950 single family homes. It is
projected that automated collection would allow the City to
consolidate the three existing routes into two routes.
Another benefit from automation would be obtained from the
conversion of the present twice weekly refuse collection service
in single family zones to a system of once per week regular trash
collection and once per week recycling collection. This change
to once per week regular trash collection and once per week
recycling collection is consistent with staff's projection of
increased recycling participation in single family areas once the
new proposed programs are implemented.
- 19 -
. .
.
,
~ A comprehensive community education program explaining the
benefits of these proposed changes would be undertaken before the
implementation of the new automated system. The most important
component of the pUblic outreach efforts will entail assisting
residents in choosing the standard refuse container size which
best meets their household's needs.
Automated collection requires significant start-up costs for both
new trucks and purchase of the standardized containers which the
City will provide to single family and small multi-family
residences. It is projected, however, that in the first year
following implementation of the automated trash collection system
annual savings for increased operating efficiencies will begin to
accrue to the City.
CONCLUSION
The proposed solid waste management plan which is described in
this report lays the foundation for the accomplishment of a 25
percent diversion of the City'S solid waste stream over the next
four years. Each of the program enhancements which is discussed
will require the commitment of financial resources from the
city's Refuse Fund and will consequently impact the level of
refuse rate increase which is necessary to maintain a positive
fund balance over the next two years.
A staff report has been distributed to council which outlines the
current financial status of the Refuse Fund and recommends a rate
increase sufficient to finance the operations of the enterprise
through the next two fiscal years. The specific costs associated
- 20 -
. .
I -
. with the enhancements summarized above are detailed in the staff
report. The rate adjustment which is recommended incorporates
the two year costs of these enhancements. The staff report also
discusses some of the remaining unknowns which could impact the
fiscal needs of the Refuse Fund within the next two year planning
period.
Prepared by: stan Scholl, Director of General Services
Neil Miller, Maintenance Manager
craig Perkins, Administrative Services Manager
Susan Munves, Administrative Analyst
- 21 -