Agenda Packets - Recycling - 2011-08-22 P zn
'O y
CMSD BOARD, OF DIRECTORS
RECYCLING 1' TEE
.AGENDA
Monday, August 22, 2011 w 10.30 ami.
Costa Mesa Sanitary District, 628 W 191h Street
STAND INQ 11 PORT'S
11. CY 2011 Recycling Committee Coals
a Review C Y 201.1 Goal,,
II. Recycling Report--June and,duly 2011
Update on how C:IISD is meeting_\lI 939 goals
III, Waste Diversion Report—June and July 2011
0 'Update on the arnor.nt of recycling materials diverted from the landfill
IV.. Ordinance Enforcement Officer's June &July Reports
Review OEO enforctrxrent acti °hies for mesh cans,graffiti and ;cavengislg
V. Scavenging,Report
Review scavenging;activities reported to
Update on the lockable containers—Oral Report
V11 Bulk Item Collection Program- Update
0 Receive an update from staff regarding this program—Oral Report
VII. New Noticing:Procedures for Trash Cans Stored in Public View
0 Receive, report on newv procedures for OF'O—Oral Report
VIII. Articles of Interest••-Supreme Court Upholds City's Ban on Plastic Grocery Bags
IX, Zero Waste Strategic Plan--Discuss the City of Oakland's Zero Waste plan.
A' '....D. ..LT11E; S
X. None
PUBLIC CC31°w1MEfijj5
XI. This is the time to receive any comments from meinhers of the public.
II. Discuss items for next Recycling;Committee meeting.
Next Meeting Date—September 19,2011
Dated; August 16,2011
Clerk of the District
E
&
�
[ / /
e g §
& ±
\ k \
I / \ \
\
0 \
§ 0 R ®
UL
o 2 e »
\ 2 / k 0
c ° = B 0) §
o (n �\ /
2 a : eg
� \ \ (D \ \
0 8 0 2 7
0 \ c 2 S ) 0
@ 0 En $ a- 3
@
f c e n q
� E A & w R &
O E
N 0 \ o !
£ 0 2
/ —
f £ 5
e s 2\
c o m = a s
§ Eƒ 2 \
e e =
°
O m G
c � 2 3 c2
ƒ o § E & n 2 _ &
E ° 2 0 a b e \@
e E
0 00% 5 0 / 2 / Ef
_
E \� E g m � \ ( \ 0
0 o O
- M > / / t k En � ( °
£ «
e / - � ° A $ 7 ƒ \ \ k ° e
t a » o e o 0 0 E m
R / 5 » 2 0 S § 2 \ k
3 2 \ / $ CL � 2 \ \ g f 2 $
Item II.
CR Transfer
To: Joan Revak
From: CR Transfer Inc.
Jurisdiction: Costa Mesa Sanitary District (9)
MonthNear: Jun-11
Recycling Report
Recycle Tons
Commodity Percentage Recycled
Newspaper 9.61% 328.53
Cardboard 7.38% 252.26
Mixed Paper 12.53% 428.27
Glass 4.17% 142.63
PET 0.95% 32.30
HDPE 0.84% 28.58
Aluminum Cans 0.27% 9.32
Metal 0.68% 23.27
Tin 1.82% 62.10
Greenwaste 10.10% 345.24
Wood 3.01% 102.91
Mixed Plastics 2.77% 94.69
Totals 54.14% 1850.10
Costa Mesa County &NB Total
Total Tonnage 3416.99 274.36 3,691.35
Recycled Tonnage 1850.10 142.59 1,992.69
Landfill Tonnage 1566.89 131.77 1,698.66
CR Transfer
To: Joan Revak
From: CR Transfer Inc.
Jurisdiction: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Santa Ana Weights (11)
Month/Year: Jun-11
Recycling Report
Recycle Tons
Commodity Percentage Recycled
Newspaper 3.91% 10.74
Cardboard 5.58% 15.30
Mixed Paper 9.08% 24.92
Glass 5.41% 14.83
PET 0.82% 2.24
HDPE 1.21% 3.32
Aluminum Cans 0.33% 0.91
Tin 2.12% 5.81
Greenwaste 14.02% 38.47
Wood 5.03% 13.80
Mixed Plastics 4.46%1 12.25
Totals 51.97% 142.59
Total Tonnage 274.36
Recycled Tonnage 142.59
Landfill Tonnage 131.77
CR Transfer
To: Joan Revak
From: CR Transfer Inc.
Jurisdiction: Costa Mesa Sanitary District(9)
Month[Year: Jul-11
Recycling Report
Recycle Tons
Commodity Percentage Recycled
Newspaper 9.61% 329.35
Cardboard 7.38% 252.90
Mixed Paper 12.53% 42934
Glass 4.17% 142.99
PET 0.95% 32.38
HDPE 0.84% 28.65
Aluminum Cans 0.27% 9.34
Metal 0.68% 23.33
Tin 1.82% 62.26
Greenwaste 10.10% 346.10
Wood 3.01% 103.17
Mixed Plastics 2.77% 94.93
Totals 54.14% 1854.75
SA Heights TOTAL
& Newport Bch.
Total Tonnage 3425.57 128.89 3554.46
Recycled Tonnage 1854.75 67.00 1921.75
Landfill Tonnage 1570.82 61.89 1632.71
CR Transfer
To: Joan Revak
From: CR Transfer Inc.
Jurisdiction: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Santa Ana Heights (11)
MonthNear: Jul-11
Recycling Report
Recycle Tons
Commodity Percentage Recycled
Newspaper 3.91% 5.05
Cardboard 5.58% 7.19
Mixed Paper 9.08% 11.71
Glass 5.41% 6.97
PET 0.82% 1.05
HDPE 1.21% 1.56
Aluminum Cans 0.33% 0.43
Tin 2.12% 2.73
Greenwaste 14.02% 18.07
Wood 5.03% 6.49
Mixed Plastics 4.46% 5.75
Totals 51.97% 67.00
Total Tonnage 128.89
Recycled Tonnage 67.00
Landfill Tonnage 61.89
I//ii
r/ J`
'FRININ
%}
li1i ! m 1 a u`f
/
mg /j Ij/ f/III/III//
l
/ISO
f j
/
OR
r f
�/
j/°
0,61
VYN /f
i'a
;N
/ b j %%
b/
r f/'o/ n v+r ;r
i
Il/f F i/rl
I 11
l,
�/
E ;.
l /
f
1 a
�/ I/
I
IS �i
f SIR
f
f � r
r dllti 3' ,ry,�
� at ��;, / I per
/u i � ui a �r i V� '��
w. �• Ira � � �� � �' y� ��% I
fYl�So
M� h• OYY %rr p.� fl� IIY:r N fIIJ� ICV V"..,. /�/1,1
i
f ! BE
2 IN
0111- mg
Elm
1 F j'
���/� 4�n.q ��/%/ i a a, ✓ �/ r y�v,it (, �/ ' �
rr
iii/
%/ j
Eff
/i
r% /�i
lbb/ ON
INNER`,.
,i i i
'11/0,111 / ,
yn��✓ v 7r•x. f���� a rr,� � 6� �, - pl /�
l%/%/Y
✓i x vr � ,�
pr j 1 r
%0
Impi
ail/i
1%j�
,
Ip
�rK
�!p 1/r
'
/ o
r 10
u r
f N , !
l/
!
1 0111
ED d
010 M
r!%
fhil ji v /,l"J%i�
1/
Y ) Y
r%
�% f
f f
om✓/ %/� r?ii��� 1 //iiii
�Vr✓ �i//i ////
Y((( v ?r!%j
%�r// /i r/, // �t i G I'
r r
/D/////%
vm
M E
/
a %«
t
ME
ON
MEN
,/ PER
1 i
�!
l
ON/ j
i
l
'F r> now,
i
Pill Ied
INS
j
B u Q
i 1 i
{
6 �
Item IV.
7)AA
COSTX .MESA SA)VT,9(R.rY(DisqXicT
w d pendent e , "
M"emorandum,
To: Scott Carroll, General Manager
From: Isidro Gallardo, Ordinance Enforcement Officer
Date: July 18, 2011
Subject: Ordinance Enforcement Report
This report summarizes major points for three ordinance enforcement topics covering
Scavenging, Graffiti, and Trash Container Enforcement.
Scavenging: In the month June, there were no calls to the District HQ to report
scavenging activity. However, there was scavenging activity I observed directly. There
was a slight increase in scavenging due to the start of the "Large Item Pick-up"
program, which began on June 17, 2011 and runs through the summer ending on
August 26, 2011.
On several occasions I observed a group of scavengers working together and
somewhat organized; using radios and cell phones to communicate, coordinate, and
"tip" each other off while going through the large items left out on the curb by residents
to be picked up by CR&R trucks. Several of them drove hauling trucks/stake beds with
signs that read "free hauling" & "call ...." to give the impression that they are a
legitimate business. But, after following them around and further questioning, they are
just illegally picking up items out on the curb.
CR&R truck drivers and Frank Campos (CR&R Route Manager) have also assisted in
the efforts to address the scavenging issue by calling me directly and providing
information of times and locations of scavenging activity when it is happening.
Areas and times were scavenging was observed by the OEO:
DATE TIME ADDRESSES
0610112011 10:OOam 1" 2200 Santa Ana Ave
06/02/2011 7:45am 3100 Gibraltar Ave
11 :25am 2960 Royal Palm Dr
06/06/2011 8:00am 1900 Monrovia Ave (surrounding streets
T'vtecting our community's(earth and tFie environment by providing soCidwaste andsewercoCCection services.
www.crosdca.gov
Ordinance Enforcement Report
July 18, 2011
Page 2 of 2
06/13/2011 11:30am 1840 Wallace Ave
06/14/2011 7.00am 750 Center St.
7:30am 700 Scott PI
06/22/2011 9:00am 2500 Elden Ave
10:15am 200 Monte Vista Ave
11:45am 200 E. Wilson St.
06/23/2011 7:30am 1 1300 Watson Ave & Conway Ave
In the above incidents, I made contact with the offender, took as much personal
information from them as possible (took pictures if able), and gave them a verbal
warning to stop scavenging.
Graffiti (Update): CR&R's field maintenance crew continues to remove graffiti from
trash cans in the 2000 Blocks of Palace Avenue, Wallace Avenue, Sterling Avenue,
700 Block of W. 20th Street, and the 600-700 blocks of Hamilton Street.
Trash Container Enforcement: In the month of June, there were five calls that came
into the District HQ to report addresses that leave their trash bins in public sight. I
made a site visit to each address to issue a first notice to all five addresses, with only
one of the addresses needing a second notice to achieve compliance:
1934 Continental Ave. 2964 Bimini PI.
2451 '/2 Elden Ave. 3133 Jefferson Ave
150 Rochester St (Second Notice needed)
In addition, time was also spent going back to addresses in the Mesa Verde
community and the College Park neighborhood that in the past have received notices
to ensure that they have not gone back to their old habits.
A summary of the courtesy notice process for the District OEO is provided in the
following chart and demonstrates the effectiveness of a "18t Notice":
dune 1-3%2Q1 1st 2 o>u esy
Not"ice Notice Letter
South of Wilson St. 9 0 0
Wilson St. to Adams Ave. 12 3 0
Adams Ave. to Sunflower Ave. 15 3 0
Other: I observed several shopping carts at different locations and reported them to
Costa Mesas' cart retrieval hotline.
700 W. 17th St. (3 carts) 2000 Maple Ave (2)
1850 Placentia Ave (1) 300 Avocado St (1)
900 Monrovia Ave (1)
rva '
( 'SIT AqTARTIDISTRIcY."
70 SAj
Memorandum
To: Scott Carroll, General Manager
From: Isidro Gallardo, Ordinance Enforcement Officer
Date: August 15, 2011
Subject: Ordinance Enforcement Report
This report summarizes major points for three ordinance enforcement topics covering
Scavenging, Graffiti, and Trash Container Enforcement.
Scavenging: In the month July, there were two calls to the District HQ to report
scavenging activity; on the 3000 Block of Fillmore Way and the 900 Block of Presidio
Dr. Upon arrival, I did not encounter any scavengers, but have continued to monitor
both areas for any further scavenging activity. Scavenging has been on-going problem
in the 3000 block of Fillmore Way; it appears the area is popular with homeless people
because they have access to dumpsters and trash containers through the alley.
Areas and times were scavenging was observed by the OEO:
DATE TIME ADDRESSES
07/01/2011 07.00am 2700 Lorenzo Ave & Mendoza Dr, 1100 Coronado Dr.
07/06/2011 08:45am 2200 Rutgers Dr
09:30am 10023 rd St
07/11/2011 10:45am 650 Plumer St
07/19/2011 07:45am 1900 Church St
09:30am 2100 Iris PI
0712812011 11:00am 1500 Coriander Dr
In the above incidents, I made contact with the offender, took as much personal
information from them as possible (took pictures if able), and gave them a verbal
warning to stop scavenging. Citation booklets have been printed and I now have the
ability to write administrative citations to violators. However, the scavengers mentioned
above are not individuals trying to make a business from recyclable materials and
therefore citations were not issued. I will be focusing my attention on those individuals
.i
Protecting our community's fieaft i andtfiie environment by providing solid-waste andsewercof(ection services.
un.m,crosdca.gov
Ordinance Enforcement Report
August 15, 2011
Page 2 of 2
operating a business out of their vehicles that are targeting recyclable materials that
are placed out on the curb.
Graffiti (Update): CR&R's field maintenance crew continues to remove graffiti from
trash cans in the 2000 Blocks of Palace Avenue, Wallace Avenue, Sterling Avenue,
700 Block of W. 20th Street, and the 600-700 blocks of Hamilton Street.
Trash Container Enforcement: In the month of July, there were seven calls that
came into the District HQ to report addresses that leave their trash bins(Vb) in public
sight(p/s). I made a site visit to each address:
3125 Limerick Lane (No t/b found in p/s) 3158 Yellowstone Dr. (No t/b in p/s)
2950 Mindanao Dr. (No t/b found in p/s) 13801 Olympic Dr. (1St Notice)
1748 Missouri Dr. (Spoke to resident) 2241 Wallace Dr. (1St Notice)
1054 Redding Dr. (1 st Notice)
I will be going to back to each address to ensure compliance. In addition, time was
also spent going back to addresses in College Park neighborhood that in the past
have received notices to ensure that they have not gone back to their old habits. Also,
a resident living in the "Lower Birds" neighborhood has requested I increase
surveillance in the area for residents who leave out their trash bins out on the curb well
after trash has been picked-up.
A summary of the courtesy notice process for the District OEO is provided in the
following chart and demonstrates the effectiveness of a 1st Notice":
July 1-31, 2011 1st 2 nd Courtesy
Notice Notice Letter
South of Wilson St. 6 0 0
Wilson St. to Adams Ave. 9 0 0
Adams Ave. to Sunflower Ave. 12 0 0
On August 15, 2011 1 will begin the District's new noticing procedures where the first
notice will be a yellow tag placed on the trash bin. A second notice will be red tag
placed on the same trash bin. Both notices are consistent with the code violation and
the potential fines if the violation persists within a one year time period. I maintain a
data base system of all the notices issued in FY 2010-11, which will be the benchmark
for determining the progress made from implementing the new noticing procedures.
Other: i observed several shopping carts at different locations and reported them to
Costa Mesas'cart retrieval hotline.
2050 Newport Blvd (1 cart)
2125 Thurin Ave (3)
725 James St (1)
Item V.
JUNE 2011 Scavenging CFS
Calls For Service with citation issued:
Locefian CAD# ]F3 : RD, (3is o Date Time
NONE NONE
Calls For Service with no arrest/citation:
Location CAQ# ()R# RD Dis o Date Time
6741.'1 18TH ST lq,PD'I 10626041467 2 GOA 06,126111 9:19:57
2322 WESTMINSTER AV LPD110621040112 12 UTL 06/21/11 0:04:19
WESTMINSTER AV&MONTE VISTA AV LPD110615038679 12 GOA 06/15/11 7:44:09
RD 12= 2
... .
. ...............
RD 15= 2
COLUMBIA DR&PRINCETON DR LPD110608037001 16 GOA 06/08/11 9:06:57
RD 16= 1
1621 CORSICA PL LPD110616038944 19 PAWC 06116111 11:07
RD19= 1
3146 SHARON LN LPD110603035799 20 GOA 06/03/11 10:29
RD 20= 1
3008 H1..LMQRE_%MY LP01"I 21 PAV C X&114/'11 4.56:14
RD 21 = 1
3107 TRINITY DR LPD110629042161 22 PAWC 06/29/11 8:52:20
RD 22= 1
RD TOTAL= 10
Dispo
KEY: Translation:
Largor Apartrnent Cornplexes Cl- Citation Issued
Smaller Multi U nit Complexes UTL- Unable To Locate
GOA- Gone On Arrival
Single Family Residence & Intersections PAWC- Party Advised,Will Comply
RTFAR- Report To Follow Arrest
Scavenging CFS June 2011
14 dew'
l 'oa�rrf„�„ ,rn nu ryr r�rfrr„r;
c a �
i
r✓rraLn,Pi /rr �A�
P�a"8' vm......r
r /
.�y rrm�Ilory�rlvy1nrr �nnr/�riii��l yJ �(� ,..
d m»,eGr r ,hG�A�1 A,1rr r _......."---__ ". ,,r Gil���r1/rilllLfIPrrviir�rr��nrrrr%, rrvrlf��(jrl lf( (llr�lrr7i+77!)�rPrIrnrmJl� r(jl(rl!(/l flln
D _u,i,r'
2714 aG �,,, Wr7 ^+z ' ldi4'°.
e g
J Y 0 i Ir w .,
q�Gd
WASAMIJ
d r
gre
�l�„r � r r�,inn w inrerrrnr/�D�n""rr ,,,,,r.�l f W ,v�� l�l/�� "�� �__•, 4'..........--(�..........
JJr 1J / , w r
"X
"s
—21111 "T
F—A
2
i ,rr r r rr f✓i em�e r „9r
m rrr rnt ,„w rrr arm�n tirrvarr
j
141A /AN/ff4Ff✓ b��u�ll�”
fu Legend:An////rf/ JAiA1! !( y.,�
1 µ Scavenging CAS 06-11
LOCATION:
1556 E MESA VERDE OR
,Arflfrrn 1621 CORSICA PL
` ° 2322 WESTMINSTER AV
3008 FILLMORE WY
INN
3107 TRINITY DR
a ” 3146 SHARON LN
674 W 18TH ST
COLUMBIA DR&PRINCETON DR
WESTMINSTER AV&MONTE VISTAAV
11 RD outline
NORTH
July 2011 Scavenging CFS
Calls For Service with citation issued:
Lsca#i4 CAD# DR# RD Oipa Dat€ Time
NONE None
Calls For Service with no arrest/citation:
Location CARD#' RD RD Dts o Date Time
IB601011-iITTIE «+�/ i�I'�1;:�I11111��ok4"I�4994.2 1 17 L,. i.4 1 7"°°11 "45.10
mm 1 = 1
674 A° '1 :4T1 S.T.. 1.FID1 1 4,724 04 9 9`7 2 CMA 4,1712 4,M 1 6-1
i:a7�'N 'ur`�s° 1841-i *„l.; Li�"iw�11 ��2 049826 2 �'1� �� 197 �'�s` „B 5;2215
. ,.
2 = 2
899 OAK ST LPD110724049242 8 UTL 07/24/11 18:18
8= 1
657 VICTORIA ST LPD110719047927 9 GOA 07/19/11 20:06
9 = 1
2217 1-1ARBOR BLVD LPD 1 I 07130A(J 4 29 10 LITI.... 07 1,3111' 19.58
900 DARRELL ST LPD110724049282 10 UTL 07/24/11 21.08
8
W WILSON ST&REPUBLIC AV LPD110711045815 10 GOA 07/11/11 6:23:54
mm
10 = 3 _
2000 PARSONS S14 i.PL)11072 M49627 itl l GOA 07127P V 6.49 37
THURIN AV&HAMILTON ST LPD110705044294 11 GOA 07/05/11 T6"3”-8
11 = 2
2311 HALF MOON LN LPD110720048012 12 GOA 07/20/11 8:58:42
12 = 1
2245 AV_ALON ST LPD110714046498 13 UTL 07/14/11 5:08:49
2356 BUL�'D BLVD L,,PD11()72004M9 13 C„ai,14 07420,1 MMM
4�11D8 H»v R 013 BI��: 1) L4����'�, D LPD1 Vii1�2i:1�1.�49572 13 GOA �1�1r6/1 r k�B.N'�;�4
13= 3
15155 L MESA ��E!PI DE F) LP0 1 10715046762 16 U1 07/15111 7:4'3',13
' N ,15�62 I � 1M BLVO BLVD I"711 ;42904 15 PAWC 47i111
.621 HARBOR G-14„'V UV�,.'�»�1;'"I A 1'Dl1rL7�I204L0:15Ia
3 � ; �" � !Ltl fO"L, 431r"1211 0 &49,4(1:
7t (DR E11,W DV,,,VID N.PIaD 1"'1!0723048966 15 UTL 07/231t"1 9 2I.4:12
15 = 4
3161 COLLEGE AV LPD110721048273 20 PAWC 07/21/11 7:50:26
W BAKER ST&FAIRVIEW DR LPD110729050387 20 GOA 07/29/11 11:46
20 = 2
1168 AUGUSTA ST LPD110729050384 21 GOA 07/29/11 11:32
BISMARK WY&VAN BUREN AV LPD110722048543 21 PAWC 07/22/11 8:35:10
CHARLESTON ST &VAN BUREN LPD110701042767 21 UTL 07/01/11 11:12
21 = 3
655 W BAKER S I,, LP0110703U3435 22 U„N,L 06.sD�1
22 = 1
3339 NEVADA AV LPD110707044943 26 GOA 07/07/11 21:16
26 = 1
RD TOTAL = 25
Larger Aparmt6wit
KEY: (:;ompiayas
snwajNleriC ulfi t'hlil�
Single Family
Residence&
Intersections
Scavenging CFS July 2011
fI y I
+9�JIYDYP,'M°'J➢��Y.)..r>YU'cnmmroNJilY;'!� !
y / pp 1pl yd
9 P".f"Y""rrrr7
1 1
V�nav COAST PL ! !
J
RLAWN..MT
� �I a ,uul!uiuDiu✓v� � � r
, �lJ 1 V! r k " —StlIFF ✓
!N[ESA 1 RC48 ��I a ✓'FN LA, p
q / VII �pV �9 Y 1i9
„ ��" �i„l N� �`r_�r
1 u�"'J9 iL
.V 711
IiP� "r�,rrir!Ih �M"
Legend:
u ESTAi1
i�tl� n Nurw��ur�rm u�uiui ��uvmmmrum��' °r�m ! r" d ��,�
! �-� Scavenging July 2011
O NGECOA$TCDLLF
IA"� A � TEWINKLE 1 n
16 Locat'o
1158 AUGUSTA ST
�- ✓ ORANGE CO FAIRGROUNDS
�V
1555 E MESAVERDE DR
WWI f uV U
FAIWfW DEV CTR
r
0
1 ! "I !nmumuumniri!wuu ;
COSTA MESA
G d 111)1I_ 1860 WH ITT[ERAV
,,.,, ., ER CALIFQR IED
T!AL r NATURE PRESER1f 2000 PARSONS ST
315 !,
p � � � - � �,� ��� ;% 2217 HARBOR BLVD
ya✓ w.w m w w v IL V /af i t
o ➢°�� iu � HsTr,
2245 AVALON ST
V, 2311 HALF MOON LN
Puri � N�w wI1/j
1 2356 HARBOR BLVD
o-r„ 2621 HARBOR BLVD
�j r " i
TAL9ERTR i'IDNAL '„ANMON ILr7l�r "'11 .'' % ` ` �,. .`, 3161 COLLEGE AV
11{I I
3339 NEVADAAV
���� r ,!-NE IF� !✓ �„ "rum�moi"nI tR✓ ✓nr✓rr �" Mi�"^"^"^'G '� "" 7� � �l,�! TUS�`-
655 W BAKER ST
657 VICTORIA T
1,01 Nry,� ` `` 674 W 18TH 5T
X06
��, ., ✓ k ,:,� 899 OAK ST
All tl
M, N rl 900 DARRELL ST
�,, ...:
Lv f+ARPE BISMARfK WY&VAN BUREN AV
�
CHARLESTON ST&VAN BUREN AV
THURIN AV&HAMILTON ST
W BAKER ST&FAIRVIEW DR
W WILSON ST&REPUBLIC AV
Reporting Districts
parks&schools A
0 C) �
04 N c"I
...................
lb.
LO
90"
O
co
-/470
CL
E co
0 LO
Cl)
0
CN
C' Mj
C)
qa
%Y
LO O LO CD CD
CN N
Off/
�L
d
m
00.0
!y !
d
00.
IEE a
00.
o`
IEEE %
oo.
o°s
00.
�o.
00,
N
0 0.
N
f-
0
N
0
.N ti v�'!
� Sao
uj
!y !
� r Op.
N r- Op6'
HUM
�A
00,C9
Op.
d
c') 0��9
�d
Ops
Op
Opp
41k
y O(2c'
Op`
N o 0) co � (D LO C� N O p'01
Supreme Court Upholds City's Ban on Plastic Grocery Bags Page 1 of 2
Item VIII.
se
Friday,Friday, July 15, 2011
Page 1
Suprem e :.ou ft IPUpholds :;ity"s ; a , on Plastic Grocie,r ° Bags
By KENNETH OFGANG, Staff Writer
The City of Manhattan Beach does not have to complete an environmental
review in order to ban retailers from providing single-use plastic bags to customers
at the point of sale, the California Supreme Court ruled yesterday.
"Substantial evidence and common sense support the city's determination that its
ordinance would have no significant environmental effect," Justice Carol Corrigan
wrote for a unanimous court, which included Court of Appeal Justice Walter
Croskey of this district's Div. Three, sitting on assignment.
The high court reversed a contrary ruling by a divided panel of this district's
Div. Five. In so doing, it vindicated Justice Richard Mosk's argument in dissent that
the potential negative effects of requiring increased paper bag use were too minimal
to force the city to go to the expense of completing an environmental impact report.
The city passed the ordinance in July 2008, citing concern over the marine
environment. It prohibits certain retailers, including grocery stores, from providing
plastic bags to customers at the point of sale, but allows them to provide reusable or
recyclable paper bags.
Over objections by the Save the Plastic Bag Coalition, a group of manufacturers,
distributors and suppliers, the city adopted a negative declaration, rather than an
EIR, under the California Environmental Quality Act.
The city concluded an environmental impact report was not required after an
initial study found the ban was likely to have "some modest impact on improving
water quality and removing a potential biohazard" and only limited negative effects
from increased paper bag use.
The coalition, however, convinced Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David
Yaffe, now retired, and the Court of Appeal that the potential impacts supported a
fair argument that the ban would be worse for the environment than the status quo.
Those impacts, the coalition argued, include greater nonrenewable energy and
water consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, solid waste production and acid rain.
In seeking Supreme Court review, the city argued that the coalition lacked
standing, and that the lower courts were wrong on the merits.
Corrigan said the coalition had standing, both as a citizen and as a representative
of directly affected businesses. A 2000 Court of Appeal case cited by the city,
holding that citizen standing is less available to corporations than to individuals,
was wrongly decided, the jurist concluded.
http://www.metnews.com/articles/2011/bags07151 Lhtm 7/15/2011
Supreme Court Upholds City's Ban on Plastic Grocery Bags Page 2 of 2
But the city is right on the merits, the justice said, because the coalition failed to
demonstrate a prejudicial abuse of discretion in adopting the negative declaration.
While the overall negative impacts of manufacturing, distributing, and disposing
of paper bags were amply demonstrated, Corrigan explained, it is not the role of a
reviewing court under CEQA to engage in such comprehensive environmental
analysis.
"When we consider the actual scale of the environmental impacts that might
follow from increased paper bag use in Manhattan Beach, instead of comparing the
global impacts of paper and plastic bags, it is plain the city acted within its
discretion when it determined that its ban on plastic bags would have no significant
effect on the environment," the justice wrote.
A city the size of Manhattan Beach—which has fewer than 40,000 residents--is
not likely to suffer significant new pollution or congestion from vehicles delivering
paper bags, the justice reasoned. Nor is it likely that the number of consumers who
would use paper bags—as opposed to alternatives reusable bags or recycled
plastic—is so great as to significantly increase the city's solid waste disposal
burden, she said.
Corrigan acknowledged that a finding of significant environmental impact may,
in an appropriate case, be based on cumulative impacts a challenged action might
have in conjunction with similar actions in other localities or by the state.
Plastic bag bans, the justice noted, have been considered or enacted in San
Francisco, Santa Monica, Oakland, and unincorporated Los Angeles County, among
other places. (A statewide ban was proposed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger,
but rejected last year by the Legislature.)
But "Manhattan Beach is small enough that even the cumulative effects of its
ordinance would be negligible," Corrigan wrote.
The case was argued in the Supreme Court for the city and its amici--Heal the
Bay, Californians Against Waste, League of California Cities, California State
Association of Counties, and The Manhattan Beach Residents Association—by
James G. Moose of Sacramento and Christian L. Marsh of San Francisco. San
Francisco attorney Stephen L. Joseph represented the Save the Plastic Bag
Coalition, which had the support of amicus Pacific Legal Foundation.
The case is Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach, l l
S.O.S. 3883.
Copyright 2091, Metropolitan News Company
http://www.metnews.com/aiticles/2011/bags071511.htm 7/15/2011
Item IX.
Attachment 1
Zero Waste
Strategic Plan
City of Oakland
Public Works Agency
www.zerowasteoaktand.com
Change the Rules to Shifting Subsidies and
Reward Sustainable Incentives So Wasters Pay
Actions
i
�0.l�ifllW69llbNiv' '90(�'t�%oiw�
p ,
Eliminate Waste by
Jobs from i� Redesigning Products
Design & fif and Systems
Discards
iil Foster Sustainable and
q/�uxw u.ye,pry„, Green Businesses
� �Yf�I�D111Pl�N,VAU1//'�H1p�A19/NIJ�OW�IY��
Land for Resource Recovery
Retailers Take Back
� Products/inform Consumers
Producer Responsibility M� ;� Empowered
Consumer
O Copynghl Eco-Cyde,2004 with text modAcetlons by permission.
www.ecocycl e.org/zerowa stelzwsystem
The world will not evolve past its current state of crisis by
using the same thinking that created the situation.
ALBERT EINSTEIN
November 28, 2006
Table of Contents
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................. ...........1
II. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................5
111. EXISTING CONDITIONS.....................................................................................................7
IV. SELECTED STRATEGIES..................................................................................................11
Strategy #1: Expand and Transform Local and Regional Recycling and Composting ........1 I
Strategy#2: Develop and Adopt New Rules and Incentives to Reduce Waste Disposal.....13
Strategy#3: Preserve Land for Sustainable Development and Green Industry
Infrastru.cture....................................................................... ...............14
Strategy#4: Advocate for Manufacturer Responsibility for Product Waste,
BanProblem Materials ....................................................................................................16
Strategy #5: Educate, Promote and Advocate a Zero Waste Sustainability Agenda ...........18
V. CONCLUSION................................................................... .....21
Exhibit A - Environmental Hierarchy to Guide Oakland's Zero Waste Strategies, Policies and
Actions
Exhibit B —City of Oakland's Existing Recycling and Waste Reduction Programs
Exhibit C— Oakland Recycling and Reuse Companies
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Overview
In keeping with its goal of becoming a Sustainable City, the Oakland City Council adopted a
Zero Waste Goal in March 2006. To reach that goal, Council directed staff to develop a Zero
Waste Strategic Plan (Plan). Zero Waste is an ambitious goal, and no single strategy will
achieve Zero Waste. This Executive Summary presents selected strategies in brief, and they are
further detailed in the Selected Strategies section of this Plan. These strategies prioritize
"upstream" solutions to stop waste before it is created, and include initiatives to improve and
expand traditional, "end of the pipeline"recycling programs and public education.
Why Zero Waste?
The volume, complexity, and toxicity of waste are increasing each year, despite Oakland's
successful recycling efforts. Growing consumption of material and energy for consumer products
is impacting global life support systems. Extraction, processing, production, transportation, use,
and disposal of consumer goods are linked to most major environmental problems including
habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, global climate change, and the public health and social
disruption associated with these problems. Local municipal waste management systems are not
intended for or suited to managing complex and toxic waste. Decisions about wasteful product
design and packaging are made by manufacturers and marketers. Local governments and rate
payers are relegated to bearing the inappropriate burdens of increasing costs and risks to manage
end-.of--life products and materials. Zero Waste represents a fundamentally different approach
that tackles the root causes of wasting and broadens responsibility for the solutions.
Zero Waste Goes Beyond "Waste Diversion"
Oakland residents and businesses have exceeded the state mandate of 50% waste diversion by
reducing landfill waste disposal from 580,000 to 400,000 tons per year over the past 15 years.
This 30% reduction in annual disposal tons since 1990 enabled Oakland to achieve 55% waste
diversion based on the calculated waste diversion projection for 2005 of the California Integrated
Waste Management Board (CIWMB). The CIWMB's complex waste diversion calculation
includes adjustments and credits for population and economic factors. This Plan represents a
fundamentally different approach to reducing waste, by setting a far more ambitious goal of
sending only 40,000 tons per year to landfill by 2020. Zero Waste does not just manage the "end
of the pipeline" disposition of products and materials. Rather, it acknowledges the vast flow of
resources and waste through our society and economy, challenges the wasteful and inefficient
use of material and energy resources, and creates greater opportunities for local sustainable
economic development.
Selected Strategies
No single strategy can achieve Zero Waste. The following strategies encompass traditional,"end
of the pipeline" recycling programs as well as "upstream" solutions to product waste, and policy
and regulatory changes.
1. Expand and Improve Local and Regional Recycling and Composting
We need to do better at what we are already doing, including City operations. Oakland
residents recycle more each year, local private-sector recyclers with access to Pacific Rim
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 1 of 21
markets via the Port of Oakland help businesses reduce waste, and construction and
demolition debris recycling continues to increase. Yet large amounts of recyclable and
compostable materials are landfilled each day. Maximizing waste reduction from programs
that are already capitalized and in place is both efficient and cost-effective. Increasing
recycling and composting will require greater engagement with the business community and
general public; additional local and regional recovery facilities and services; and new
initiatives and innovations.
2. Develop and Adopt New Rules and Incentives to Reduce Waste Disposal
Oakland's Municipal Code and garbage franchise have provided a good framework for
achieving 54% waste diversion. However, meeting the City's 75% waste diversion and Zero
Waste goals will require ending the current incentive for landfilling. Other cities in and
beyond the Bay Area have developed systems that realign economic incentives to reward all
parties for reducing waste, and end the incentive to landfill. Development and adoption of a
new waste management system design in preparation for Oakland's next collection and
disposal contract is key to the goal of reducing waste. Other new rules and incentives detailed
in this Plan are needed to encourage and reward reuse, repair, and reduced consumption.
3. Preserve Land for Sustainable Development and Green Industry Infrastructure
Increased recovery of a broader variety of materials will require more businesses and more
services, producing more green collar jobs for Oakland residents. Industrial land close to the
Port and to transportation and other support services is urgently needed for concrete crushing,
recycled asphalt production, and other activities to reuse and recycle building materials.
Reuse and deconstruction businesses create more jobs than recycling and disposal, and also
need space to grow. Manufacturing new products from local recycled materials could drive
further green industry and workforce development, and will require appropriate industrial
land. Land for Zero Waste infrastructure should be strategically allocated, just as it is for
vital public infrastructure such as wastewater treatment facilities and power generation.
4. Advocate for Manufacturer Responsibility for Product Waste, Ban Problem Materials
Every year brings an increase in complex, toxic and non-recyclable products and packaging.
This increase is outpacing local government's ability to safely and cost-effectively handle the
associated wastes, as well as increasing Oakland's future environmental liability. Unless this
cycle is corrected, not even a high-performing recycling region like ours can recycle our way
to Zero Waste. Oakland needs to join regional, statewide, national, and international efforts
to end the "waste subsidy" for manufacturers that is currently borne by local governments
and ratepayers, and to insist that the costs and risks to manage end-of-life products and
materials be the responsibility of manufacturers. Such measures can provide incentives for
manufacturers to "design the waste out" so that products can be readily reused, repaired,
reconditioned, or recycled. Local retailers can assist in collecting and returning selected
products to manufacturers. Use or sale of problematic products can also be banned, as
Oakland has recently done for expanded polystyrene food packaging, and the European
Union and China are doing for hazardous materials in electronic products.
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 2 of 21
5. Educate, Promote and Advocate a Zero Waste Sustainability Agenda
Efforts have been made in Oakland to educate, inform, and instruct the general public and
specific targeted audiences on how and why to reduce, reuse, and recycle. Yet many do not
participate, even where convenient recycling systems are in place. Meanwhile, much of the
language of Zero Waste and sustainability has been focused on a policy-making audience and
not the general public. There is a need for messaging and communications that speak clearly
and concisely about Zero Waste and sustainability in a way that makes sense in people's
daily lives, so as to move society from awareness into acceptance and action. Educating and
engaging diverse audiences will require innovative developments in the message and how it
is communicated, along with effective price signals and other financial incentives. It will be
necessary to develop partnerships within and beyond Oakland to pursue and advocate for
needed policy and behavioral changes, incentives and new rules, and to listen to questions,
concerns, and ideas about the new approach.
Environmental Hierarchy to Guide Oakland's Zero Waste Strategies, Policies, and Actions
Oakland's pursuit of a Zero Waste Goal will be guided by an environmental hierarchy for
`highest and best use' of materials and pollution prevention in all phases of production, use, and
disposition of products and materials (see Exhibit A). Zero Waste has been defined by the Zero
Waste International Alliance as an economic and physical system that emulates natural cycles,
where all outputs are simply an input for another process. This means designing and managing
materials and products to place highest priority on conserving resources and retaining their form
and function without burning, burying, or otherwise destroying their form and function. It means
eliminating discharges to land, water or air that harm natural systems. It means preventing, rather
than managing, waste and pollution, and recommitting to the priority ordering of the waste
reduction hierarchy: first reduce consumption; next, reuse what is left; and finally, recycle
anything that is no longer usable and landfill any residual.
Measuring Progress Toward Oakland's Zero Waste Goal
Oakland's Zero Waste Goal is to cut the City's current waste disposal of 400,000 tons per year to
40,000 tons per year — a 90% reduction. This will require double the waste disposal reduction
that Oakland has achieved over the past 15 years. It goes far beyond what any U.S. city has
achieved to date, and would make Oakland the national leader of large cities in waste reduction.
Rather than use the state's diversion calculation described earlier, progress toward the Zero
Waste Goal will be measured by the actual amount of annual waste landfilled. Table 1 on the
next page shows Oakland's goals in five-year intervals, ending with the 2020 Zero Waste Goal
year.
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 3 of 21
Table 1
Oakland Zero Waste Annual Disposal Goals
Year Disposal Tons
1990 580,000 Actual
2005 400,000 Current
2010 300,000 Intermediate Goal
2015 150,000 Intermediate Goal
2020 40,000 Zero Waste Goal
* This represents a 55% diversion rate,based on the state's diversion calculation projection
The rapid acceleration in reducing waste disposal beyond 2010 is only feasible through major
transformations that realign economic incentives to end the incentive toward landfilling (Strategy
#2) and ensure that manufacturers assume responsibility for managing end-of-life products and
materials (Strategy#4).
Conclusion
Zero Waste challenges the wasteful and inefficient one-way system of `extract, consume and
discard' and creates greater opportunity for sustainable economic development. This Plan to
reach Oakland's ambitious goal of Zero Waste includes strategies to guide Oakland toward
becoming a Sustainable City. The strategies prioritize "upstream" solutions to prevent waste
before it is created, emphasize improving traditional "end of the pipeline" recycling programs,
and identify the critical need for public education and economic solutions. By adopting and
implementing this Plan, the City will take responsibility for its own destiny and help preserve
resources and a healthy environment for future generations to enjoy.
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 4 of 21
II. BACKGROUND
On March 6, 2006 the Oakland City Council approved Oakland Resolution #79774 C.M.S.
which adopted a Zero Waste Goal by 2020 for the City and directed staff to develop a Zero
Waste Strategic Plan to provide guidance in the planning and decision-making process to achieve
the City's Zero Waste Goal. At the same time the Council approved Oakland Resolution#79775
C.M.S. adopting a Strategic Plan for achieving Oakland's goal of 75% waste reduction by 2010,
which identified that Zero Waste strategies would be necessary for Oakland to achieve its 75%
goal.
In order to develop Oakland's Zero Waste Strategic Plan, Public Works Agency staff, in concert
with the Mayor's Office, conducted four meetings to solicit input and receive feedback from the
general public and sustainable business leaders. At the first public meeting on June 28, 2006,
participants were introduced to Zero Waste concepts and Oakland's sustainability goals. At the
second public meeting on July 19, 2006, participants reviewed possible Zero Waste options and
strategies for Oakland, and provided input on which to pursue. At the third public meeting on
September 20, 2006, participants reviewed and provided input on the proposed strategies to be
included in the Strategic Plan. Additionally, on June 29, 2006, staff convened a meeting of
Oakland sustainable business leaders to introduce Oakland's Zero Waste Goal to businesses who
are already practicing intensive waste reduction and other sustainable business practices, and to
receive their input on how best to engage, inspire, support, and incentivize Oakland business
toward widespread alignment with and support of Oakland's Zero Waste Goal. The agenda and
meeting summary from each meeting can be viewed at www.zerowasteoakland.com.
A series of state, county, and City legislative and policy initiatives on waste reduction, health,
environmental protection, and sustainability over the past 15 years provide the framework for
Oakland's adoption and pursuit of a Zero Waste Goal:
• California AB 939 (1989) and Oakland Resolution#66253 C.M.S. (1990) set initial goals for
reducing waste disposal to landfills by 2000, and developing markets for recyclable materials
• City of Oakland Resolution #68780 C.M.S. (1992) authorized establishment of a state-
designated City Recycling Market Development Zone
• Alameda County Ballot Measure D (The Alameda County Waste Reduction and Recycling
Initiative Charter Amendment, 1990) and Oakland Resolution #77500 C.M.S. (2002)
elevated waste reduction goals to 75% by 2010
• City of Oakland Ordinance#612253 C.M.S. (2002) amended the Oakland Municipal Code to
establish construction and demolition debris waste reduction and recycling requirements
Beyond solid waste disposal reduction and recycling market development, the following actions
toward sustainability have been approved by the City of Oakland:
• City of Oakland Resolution#74678 C.M.S. (1998) adopted sustainability goals
• City of Oakland Resolution #74773 C.M.S. (1999) established a policy and task force to
reduce dioxin emissions
• City of Oakland Resolution 479135 C.M.S. (2005) established Oakland's membership in the
Chicago Climate Exchange, a market for reducing and trading greenhouse gas emissions,
which provides a means for the City to achieve the goal of 15% reduction in greenhouse
gasses by 2010 that the City Council established in 1998
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 5 of 21
• City of Oakland FY 2005-07 Mayor and City Council Goals include; Develop A Sustainable
City
• In June 2005 Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown signed the United Nations World Environment
Day Urban Environmental Accords, pledging that Oakland would implement 21 action steps
toward sustainability, including adopting a Zero Waste Goal
• Staff from PWA-Recycling and CEDA-Recycling Market Development Zone are
participating in a newly-formed Bay Area Zero Waste Communities working group, which
comprises local governments that have adopted Zero Waste goals and seek to Join with other
communities to partner, share, and leverage pursuit of Zero Waste strategies and actions, and
includes representatives from the Cities of San Francisco, Berkeley and Palo Alto, and Santa
Cruz County.
• Since March 2006, the Mayor's Office has taken a leadership role in establishing the
California Product Stewardship Council, whose stated mission is, "To shift California's
product waste management system from one focused on government funded and ratepayer
financed waste diversion to one that relies on producer responsibility in order to reduce
public costs and drive improvements in product design."
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 6 of 21
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Overview
Oakland is situated at the geographical center of the San Francisco Bay Area, and is the
commercial, cultural, population, and transportation center of the East Bay. It has a diverse
population of 411,000 residents, 26,000 businesses, and 60,000 daytime workers in the
downtown alone (per Community and Economic Development Agency data). Oakland is a
vibrant hub of economic activity, which includes business and fmance; regional medical and
educational facilities; and warehousing, distribution, and trade - much of it related to the City's
deepwater maritime port, which is the 3rd largest on the U.S. west coast. As a built-out city with
little undeveloped land, future development largely will be in the form of reconstruction, reuse,
or transformation of existing properties. The allocation and location of land use activities to
accommodate future needs presents a key challenge and opportunity.
This section describes existing conditions that are relevant to selecting strategies to guide the
planning and decision-making process to achieve the City's Zero Waste Goal, including profiles
and data on Oakland's waste disposal; waste reduction programs, activities, infrastructure, and
achievements; Municipal Code; and Garbage Franchise.
Solid Waste Disposal
Oakland's current waste disposal is approximately 400,000 tons per year. Table 2 below shows
that 67% of Oakland's waste comes from non-residential sources, including 30% that is self-
hauled directly to disposal facilities by waste generators over which the City has little control or
influence. Generators who haul their own waste to the Davis Street Transfer Station and other in-
county disposal facilities include institutions such as Cal Trans, AC Transit, BART, PG&E,
EBMUD, Peralta College District, and the Port of Oakland, as well as independent contractors
and the City, which itself hauls over 1 5,000 tons per year. Approximately 30,000 tons per year,
much of it from construction and demolition projects, is self-hauled to out-of-county disposal
facilities.
Table 2
Oakland's 400,000 Tons/Year Disposal by Sector
67%Non Residential
Conrnercial Roll-off
21% 16%
Q,. `pelf-Haul
Sing 30%
23% Wlti Family
10%
.__.....Mesidential„
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 7 of 21
Table 3 below shows that 67% of what is currently disposed is recyclable using existing methods
and technologies, and could be diverted if properly separated from other materials and recycled.
A diversity of local and regional recovery and diversion opportunities exist for paper, glass,
metals, plastics, yard trimmings, food, clean wood, concrete, asphalt, and roofing. They are
underutilized because generators are not sufficiently motivated, or are unaware of these
opportunities. Lack of motivation is often due to financial or convenience considerations. Little
or no recycling, reuse, or repair opportunities currently exist for 33% of the products and
materials disposed. The major waste components that currently cannot be recycled or composted
in Oakland are listed in Table 3,
Table 3
Oakland's 400,000 Tons/Year Disposal by Material
Clean Wood &Other
Yard Trimmings
Food Waste Organics Currently Cannot Be
0
Metals 12% 9% Concrete, Asphalt, Recycled or
6% Roofing Composted
6% 33%
Painted Wood
Glass Painted Wallboard
1%
Carpet
Mixed Plastics
Plastic Textiles and
5%
Leather
Diapers
Furniture
Paper Industrial
19% Equipment
Oakland's waste disposal system has experienced similar changes as those in the rest of the U.S.
as product and packaging waste continues to increase in volume, complexity, and toxicity.
Nationally, since 1960:
• Per capita product and packaging waste disposal has doubled
• Product and packaging waste comprise 75% of landfill disposal
• Product and packaging waste has increased at twice the rate of population increase
Waste-Based Energy
A new generation of high-temperature thermal processing technologies that would consume
mixed municipal solid waste is being marketed to local jurisdictions as "zero waste" alternatives
to landfill disposal, and purport to replace fossil fuels with alternative, "sustainable" fuels made
from waste. These waste-based energy technologies are being promoted by the California
Energy Commission and the CIWMB under the rubric of"Emerging Technologies".
While these technologies may be suitable for a uniform., controlled feedstock such as agricultural
scrap or manure, they are at the bottom of the Environmental Hierarchy (Exhibit A) for
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 8 of 21
municipal solid waste and are fundamentally contrary to Zero Waste because most of the
resource-depleting impacts of products occur by the time they are consumed and disposed.
Additionally:
• Wasted resources are not a sustainable feedstock for energy production and only facilitate
continued resource depletion, much the way landfills do
• These technologies institutionalize waste, by making waste a "commodity" feedstock for the
energy production industry
• These facilities require large energy inputs to capture only fractions of the embodied energy
in wasted material -net energy output is unproven and disputed
• These facilities are capital intensive, and typically require local jurisdictions to guarantee
delivery of established volumes of waste, or pay for volume deficits, (known as "put or pay"
contracts)
• By contrast, waste reduction, traditional recycling and composting are producing known,
current, quantifiable net energy savings and reduction in greenhouse gasses through existing
infrastructure, at significantly lower cost, and with greater local job creation
• The safe containment of hazardous substances produced by these facilities is unproven;
disposal of toxic by-products and emissions to air, land and water are significant public
health concerns
While these technologies may appeal to the goals and values of some communities, they distract
them from progressing toward true sustainability.
Waste Reduction Programs and Achievements
In achieving and exceeding the state-mandated goal of 50% waste reduction by 2000, Oakland
has reduced its disposal by 180,000 tons per year over the past 15 years. In addition:
• Many Oakland residents have used available franchised recycling and composting services to
recycle more and more each year
• Some Oakland businesses have used the vibrant local private-sector recycling economy and
other waste prevention actions to significantly reduce waste
• Construction and demolition debris recycling has doubled since the City adopted its
Construction and Demolition Debris Waste Reduction and Recycling Requirements (C&D
Recycling) Ordinance in 2000, and as of 2005 exceeds 75,000 tons per year.
• Waste reduction programs and initiatives of the regional agency StopWaste.Org have served
as an overlay and complement to the City's programs, including: StopWaste Partnership
which assists many of Oakland's largest commercial and institutional entities; recycling,
reuse, and repair information services through its Recycling Guide, online Recycling Wizard,
and Recycling Hotline; Bay Friendly Gardening and home composting program; grant and
recycling market development projects; and schools recycling project.
More comprehensive information on the City's existing waste reduction and recycling programs
and achievements is provided in Exhibit B.
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 9 of 21
Increasing Waste Diversion vs. Decreasing Waste Disposal
Oakland continues to exceed state-mandated 50% waste diversion as measured using the state's
calculation method. The state's waste diversion calculation uses complex formulas that include
population and economic index adjustment factors, and many other credits rather than measuring
the actual reduction in waste disposal tons. Using this waste diversion method to measure
progress toward sustainability is less relevant in the face of global resource depletion and climate
change; health and social effects of accelerating global production and trade; and Oakland's
Sustainable City goal.
Municipal Code
The Oakland Municipal Code (OMC) provides the legislative framework that governs Oakland's
solid waste and recycling system. OMC Chapter 8.28, Solid Waste Collection and Disposal and
Recycling, explicitly defines solid waste, which is subject to Oakland's exclusive Franchise
Agreement for Solid Waste and Yard Waste Collection and Disposal Services (Franchise); and
non-franchised recyclable and organics materials, which have been separated from mixed solid
waste. Any premises generating mixed solid waste must subscribe to services and pay rates
defined by the Franchise. No one other than the franchisee may collect, transport, or dispose
mixed solid waste except for the generators themselves, who may self-haul mixed waste directly
to a permitted disposal site. Non-residential, source-separated recyclable materials may be
collected by others, and there are many such private collectors operating in Oakland.
OMC Chapter 15.34, C&D Recycling, requires that building permit applicants for most building
and all demolition projects prepare a waste reduction and recycling plan indicating how they will
achieve the minimum program requirements. The most recent OMC amendment (Chapter 8.07)
related to waste reduction is an Ordinance that takes effect January 1, 2007 prohibiting use of
polystyrene foam disposal food service ware by restaurants, take-out food vendors, and City
facilities, and requiring that all disposable food service ware is biodegradable.
Garbage Franchise Agreement
Oakland's Franchise Agreement for Solid Waste and Yard Waste Collection and Disposal
Services (Franchise) grants an exclusive franchise for collection of residential and non-
residential mixed solid waste to a sole franchisee and defines the terms of collection and landfall
disposal services to be provided by the franchisee, as well as rates charged to customers,
franchise and other fees paid to the City by the franchisee, and other provisions. Services
provided under the Franchise include citywide collection of yard trimmings, food scraps, and
bulky collection for single-family residences; collection and disposal services for City
government operations; street litter container collection; and residential recycling for the
southern half of the City.
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 10 of 21
IV. SELECTED STRATEGIES
No single strategy can achieve Zero Waste. The following strategies encompass traditional, "end
of the pipeline"recycling programs as well as "upstream" solutions to product waste, and policy
and regulatory changes. For each strategy there is a description, an explanation of why the
strategy has been selected, and recommended next steps to implement the strategy.
Strategy#l.: Expand and Improve Local and Regional RecyclinL and Composting
Description of Strategy: Expand and improve existing programs for waste reduction and
recycling to maximize public awareness and use of available services and options. Maximize
waste reduction from programs and opportunities that are already in place, and develop new
ones. Increase recycling and composting through greater engagement with the business
community and general public; additional local and regional recovery facilities and services; and
new initiatives and innovations.
Why Strategy Selected: Well-established, existing recycling programs and services require
continuous focused attention to sustain and increase participation and effectiveness. These
programs and services have not fully penetrated all market sectors, and awareness of waste
recycling and reduction options by current and prospective participants requires continuous
communication and reinforcement. New efforts and initiatives will be required, and existing
ones may need to be expanded or transformed to meet the ambitious Zero Waste Goal.
Participation in Oakland's residential recycling program increased dramatically with the 2005
roll-out of the "New Weekly Pickup." However, it is estimated that only 15% of residences use
the food scraps service that was added to the now-weekly, unlimited yard trimmings service.
Most residents do not participate in the food scraps program, despite citywide distribution of
food scraps containers in 2005 that was accompanied by a comprehensive marketing and
educational campaign, and an on-going regional media campaign by StopWaste.Org.
Recycling awareness and participation are significant issues in the non-residential sector, which
generates two-thirds of Oakland's waste. An extensive free-market recycling infrastructure
exists in Oakland thanks to immediate access to the Port, and the Oakland Municipal Code that
encourages entrepreneurial free market competition for collection of recyclable materials. The
City's Small Business Recycling Program, a component of Oakland's residential recycling
service contracts, offers cost-effective collection to business that may be too small to attract
service providers in the open market.
While these recycling services are available throughout the City and serve businesses of all sizes,
it can still be difficult for business and institutional waste generators to learn about or obtain
these services, or to see the value in using them. The City's most significant monitoring and
active engagement with private sector recycling comes through oversight of the diversion
requirements established under the C&D Recycling Ordinance. One key to maximizing results
in the non-residential sector is a comprehensive outreach and marketing campaign on waste
reduction and recycling. Such a campaign needs to engage, partner with, and leverage all types
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page I 1 of 21
of non-residential recycling service providers, and complement an active and ongoing
collaboration with the countywide StopWaste Partnership and Bay Area Green Business
Program to provide direct technical support including on-site assistance. It is also important to
increase understanding, access to, and embracing of waste reduction opportunities beyond
recycling, including: `reduce, reuse, return, and repair'.
Continuous evaluation of the effectiveness of the services provided to the residential and non-
residential sectors by City contract and on the open market will help inform policy and program
development related to the other strategies described in this plan.
Recommended Next Steps to Implement Strategy:
• Promote development of adequate regional composting and recycling processing capacity
• Require deconstruction and salvage of structures on the former Oakland Army Base (per the
1997 OAB Conditions and Trends Summary Report)
• Expand Oakland's C&D Recycling Ordinance to include a broader range of projects, provide
financial or procedural incentives, and expand informational resources and technical
assistance
• Expand Oakland's C&D Recycling Ordinance to include incentives for deconstruction and
salvage, in tandem with market development for deconstruction, salvage, and source
separated debris recycling
• Implement and sustain a comprehensive marketing and technical assistance program
targeting non-residential waste reduction, leveraging and partnering with the existing free-
market recyclers
• Build on existing regional residential food scraps recycling promotion efforts to overcome
barriers to participation
• Require recycling and waste reduction plans as part of City of Oakland permit and rental
agreements for events and facility rentals, and develop and implement such plans for City-
sponsored events
• Add selected recyclable materials to residential recycling collection, such as wide-mouth
plastic containers, where feasible
• Renew promotion of Oakland's multi-family recycling program, including development of
new informational and outreach approaches to non-participants, and incentives to participate
• Engage with recycling service providers to identify opportunities for City assistance, such as
printed brochures and technical assistance specific to non-residential food scraps; and
implement feasible programs
• Promote and expand programs that recognize and reward the achievements of green and
sustainable business, enabling them to benefit from differentiating their products and services
in the marketplace.
• Continue to fluid and promote the Green Business, Green Restaurant, East Bay Green
Coupon Book and other"pro-commerce"Zero Waste related efforts
• Support StopWaste.Org development of a Sustainable Business Rating System
• Explore and evaluate the benefits of instituting permit, license, or non-exclusive franchise
system for non-residential recycling service providers that includes reporting and diversion
requirements
• Explore and evaluate the benefits of partnering with other cities to develop and expand
customer incentives to reduce service levels and reduce wasting
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 12 of 21
• Explore and evaluate the benefits of expanding multi-family recycling services to include
weekly yard trimmings and food waste collection
• Explore and evaluate the benefits of increasing opportunities to drop-off reusables,
recyclables and compostables beyond normal week-day hours
• Explore and evaluate the benefits of promoting online services to divert reusable goods from
residences and businesses
Strategy#2: Develop and Adopt New Rules and Incentives to Reduce Waste Disposal
Description of Strategy: Redesign Oakland's waste collection and landfill system, realigning
economic incentives to reward all parties for reducing waste, and ending the incentive to landfill.
Research, review, evaluate, and implement policies and programs to restructure Oakland's
municipal code and contracts for garbage collection, transfer, and landfill disposal; as well as
residential recycling collection service and materials processing and marketing, so that all parties
have a clear and consistent incentive to reduce wasting. Ban disposal to landfill of easily
recyclable or problematic materials. Examples of disposal bans include those enacted by Seattle,
Washington for corrugated cardboard; 32 states, including California, for tires; and 23 states, and
the Counties of San Diego and Sonoma in California, for yard trimmings. Ban the use of
disposable, toxic, or non-renewable products such as Oakland's recently approved ban on the use
of polystyrene foam take-out food containers. Promote and facilitate increased Green Building
practices, including: design for energy efficiency; the use of recycled-content products; and
construction techniques that increase operating and maintenance efficiency over the life of the
building. Adopt other new rules and incentives to encourage and reward `reduce, reuse, and
recycle' behaviors.
Why Strategy Selected: In most cities, including Oakland, current waste collection and landfill
systems are in fundamental conflict with achieving Zero Waste for a number of reasons. The
provision of artificially low-cost collection and landfilling of discarded materials enables wasting
of products and resources, and in effect subsidizes the cost of end-of-life product management
for manufacturers. Likewise, waste-based energy production joins landfilling at the bottom of
the Environmental Hierarchy (Exhibit A) for municipal solid waste because it enables wasting of
products and resources, rather than their sustainable use and conservation. The costs of the
environmental and public health impacts of wasting and resource depletion are not accounted for,
and will accrue in the future to local governments and rate payers.
Typical municipal garbage franchises have a financial incentive to landfill because the garbage
collection and landfill companies that hold the franchises profit more from garbage collection
and landfilling than from waste reduction and recycling activities. Having one company that is
franchised to do both garbage collection and landfilling typically compounds this problem. By
contrast, some cities and their garbage collectors are aligned in their financial interest to preserve
finite, contracted, third parry landfill capacity because neither has a financial interest in landfill
disposal.
Oakland must start now to develop and adopt a new waste management system design in
preparation for its next collection and disposal contracts, and to research and structure
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste .Page 13 of 21
progressive measures toward product and disposal bans. For example, by implementing bans on
materials that can be discarded or products that can be purchased, Oakland will join other cities
that are stimulating markets for alternative products, practices and processes that are consistent
with Zero Waste goals. Similarly, by promoting and facilitating increased Green Building
practices, the City will build upon steps taken to increase Green Building design and
construction methods for its own facilities. Integrating Green Building features into the full
range of construction and demolition projects in Oakland will reduce the impact of building
activities on the use and wasting of materials and resources, and can result in economic and
environmental benefits including energy, water, and materials use efficiency which fulfill major
goals of Oakland's Sustainable Development Initiative.
Recommended Next Steps to Implement Strategy_:
• Restructure Oakland's municipal code, garbage franchise agreement, and residential
recycling service contracts to provide clear and consistent incentives to reduce waste for both
generators and service providers so that those who waste pay the most:
• 2007-2008: Research, review, and evaluate options for alternative structures, such as
financially separating solid waste collection from landfilling, and structure clear and
consistent incentives to reduce disposal
• 2009-2010: Negotiate and finalize alternative structures
• 2010: Approve alternative structures
• 2012: Implement alternative structures
• Implement a measured, phased approach to banning from disposal readily recyclable
materials such as corrugated cardboard. Initial phases could include mandatory recycling
plans for the largest generators and over time expand to include all. Eventually, it would be
mandatory to follow these recycling plans and eliminate wasting. In general, implement bans
only after incentives and voluntary efforts fail to achieve goals.
• Preclude Oakland's franchised waste from being used for high-temperature thermal waste-
based energy production
• Develop and share Green Building resources for education and technical assistance
• Add green building standards to the City building code that require design for energy
efficiency; the use of recycled-content products; and construction techniques that increase
operating and maintenance efficiency over the life of the building
Strategy#3: Preserve Land for Sustainable Development and Green Industry
Infrastructure
Description of StrateM. Ensure that sufficient incentives and industrial land are maintained and
expanded in order to preserve and grow businesses that reuse, recycle, and manufacture value-
added products, utilizing materials discarded locally and regionally. Coordinate and partner with
the Port of Oakland, regional governmental bodies including StopWaste.Org and the East Bay
Economic Development Alliance (EDAB), and key stakeholders to develop specific policies and
initiatives to attract, support, and sustain such businesses.
Why Strategy Selected: Recycling is a significant local industry, whose long-term viability is a
key component to Oakland's current and future waste reduction achievements, ongoing export of
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 14 of 21
key recycled commodities via the Port of Oakland, and overall economic development. Over 35
Oakland businesses currently collect, process, and/or manufacture products made from
recyclable materials, employing over 1,000 individuals, attracting raw material from throughout
the region and producing value-added products. A listing of these firms is shown in Exhibit C.
Many recycling processors seek to locate in the "Foreign Trade Zone", which is the area within
1.5 miles of the Port of Oakland Boundary, since this location allows them operating
efficiencies, including the ability to load extra heavy containers for export to China and other
Pacific Rim countries. This international market constitutes the primary outlet for the majority
of recyclable paper,metal, and plastic collected in Oakland and Northern California.
Since 1993, industrial lands in Oakland and Berkeley have constituted one of the state's 33
Recycling Market Development Zones (RMDZ). The RMDZ program offers low interest loans
and other incentives to businesses who intake collected recyclable materials for value-added
processing and manufacturing. There are currently about 20 active RMDZ firms in Oakland,
with several more in the Berkeley portion of the zone. RMDZ firms who have received loans
and grants are shown in Exhibit C.
A vibrant, local private-sector recycling and reuse economy has enabled Oakland and the region
to achieve significant levels of materials recovery under an open market system, in advance of
and supplemental to government recycling mandates. Currently, however, the City is engaged in
land use policy deliberations to evaluate retention vs. conversion of industrial land to other uses.
Within this debate, the question of"highest and best use" of the land in different parts of the City
often comes up. If measured by sales tax generated or aesthetic appeal, however, such uses may
lose out when compared to residential or commercial development. On the other hand, if current
and potentially expanded recycling-based businesses represent an opportunity for the City to
secure and grow a more sustainable economy, then zoning sufficient space for such firms
represents a high and valuable use of industrial land.
Retaining sufficient industrially-zoned land overall, and specific parcels of land dedicated to
processing certain high volume, low value materials such as asphalt and concrete, are
fundamental to Zero Waste and sustainability-oriented land use and economic development
policy. At the same time, recycling collection and processing businesses can present significant
impacts, and should be situated and operated to avoid or minimize conflict with residential or
other uses. This underscores the need for the City, and the region at large, to plan for and utilize
areas where such businesses are most appropriate, and can continue to flourish and.grow in the
future. Because the Port of Oakland has its own strategic interest in accessing recycling services
directly and recycled commodities for export, and since the Port controls the majority of
industrially zoned land in Oakland, opportunities to collaborate with the Port to secure the
needed capacity for Zero Waste infrastructure should be actively explored.
Recommended Next Steps to Implement Strategy:
• Develop policy goals and priority commitments regarding land use, workforce and business
development support and strategic partnerships with the Port of Oakland, EDAB, and
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) to retain and expand local and regional
reuse, recycling, and green manufacturing businesses and facilities, which constitute critical
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 15 of 21
infrastructure for a Sustainable City and provide "Green Collar" jobs for Oaklanders, and
other social and economic benefits
• Create business capacity to deliver services or products that utilize materials in the waste
stream that lack other infrastructure, including emerging opportunities such as recovery
and processing systems to implement Extended Producer Responsibility
• Retain sufficient industrially zoned lands to maintain a balance of jobs and housing in
Oakland, including existing and future Zero Waste infrastructure
• Actively partner with the Port of Oakland to locate major Zero Waste facilities on Port
controlled industrial lands, that are securely zoned for industrial use, afford water and rail
access, and provide services the Port itself regularly requires (e.g., aggregate concrete,
asphalt, and rock processing and production) and/or trades in large quantities (e.g.,
recyclable commodity exports)
• Recognize and address the City's interest in having accessible, cost-effective recycling
facilities for concrete and asphalt which are staples of public works road building,
ongoing private development and redevelopment activities, and anticipated expanded
green building and construction and demolition recycling requirements
• Offer tangible economic incentives and technical assistance for green, sustainable, and Zero
Waste businesses including: identifying and promoting loan programs from banks and
investors for green investments and green businesses; providing tax and/or redevelopment
incentives for relocation and/or expansion of reuse and recycling businesses through the
RMDZ and other programs; incubator support; fast track permitting; and City procurement
preferences
• Enhance and expand existing incentive programs, including RMDZ, StopWaste
Partnership, and Green Business programs
• Explore and pursue opportunities to cluster complementary businesses, either in a
resource recovery park or otherwise. Focus on top priority materials and services such as
construction and demolition materials, organics, deconstruction, salvage, reuse, and
repair. Consider public ownership, possibly by or with the Port.
• Set clear standards and assist existing reuse and recycling service providers to upgrade
their appearance and operations, in order to be good neighbors. Work with environmental
justice, neighborhood, workforce development, and business development organizations
to identify best locations for needed services. Consider levying mitigation fees on high
impact facilities to mitigate impacts of operation and to compensate those most impacted
by needed facilities.
• Partner with StopWaste.Org, EDAB, ABAG, and other regional agencies to help site new
regional processing facilities in the region that are needed, but cannot be sited within
Oakland (e.g., organics composting facility, and possibly additional C&D recycling facilities,
etc). In order to help site these locally unwelcome—but regionally vital - land uses, consider
mitigation measures such as a host fee to communities in which facilities are sited.
Strategy #4: Advocate for Manufacturer Responsibility for Product Waste, Ban Problem
Materials
Description of Strategy: Partner with other Zero Waste and sustainability advocates to pursue
and advocate for Extended Producer Responsibility and other `upstream' materials management
and system re-design solutions. Ensure that these solutions require manufacturers to assume
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 16 of 21
responsibility for managing end-of-life products and materials, and that they do so in a way that
conforms to the Environmental Hierarchy described in the Executive Summary and shown in
Exhibit A.
Why Strategy Selected: Wasting is designed into the economy. The City is limited in its
capacity and opportunity to bring about change in consumer habits and business practices, or
advance system re-design to reduce and reuse at the local level. Adoption of state and national
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation will extend the responsibility of producers
for the environmental impacts of their products and packaging to the entire product life cycle,
and require them to assume responsibility for their products and packaging in an environmentally
sustainable manner. Structured properly EPR can provide an incentive to "design the waste out"
so that products can be readily reused, repaired, reconditioned, or recycled. As a self-funded
system, EPR is one of the most powerful opportunities that exist to move society and the
economy towards Zero Waste, particularly for products and packaging items that are currently
difficult to recycle.
The term `system redesign' as applied to Zero Waste is used to describe transforming the current
one-way `extract, use and discard' system toward one that redesigns products and processes for a
closed-loop sustainable production and consumption cycle. In such a system, non-toxic,
naturally occurring materials and substances are used, products are designed for easy
disassembly, reuse and recycling, and outputs break down to be re-assimilated safely into the
environment when all useful value is lost. Zero Waste system redesign policies and practices
stimulate the development and production of more environmentally sustainable products, and
will reduce the management and clean-up costs of waste facilities, landfills and incinerators,
which are often borne by local communities. EPR would also reduce negative health effects of
wasting such as asthma that are also borne mostly at the local level, and improve the duality of
life experienced in local communities.
Recommended Next Steps to Implement Strategy:
• Participate in formal and 'informal regional, statewide, national, and international waste
reduction and sustainability working groups, particularly engaging and negotiating with
product producers and retailers to provide EPR and provide product take back opportunities,
including:
• Maintain membership in the Product Stewardship Institute (PSI) and active participation
in its national stakeholder dialogues and related activities
• Engage with advocacy groups that are working on legislative and social change to further
Zero Waste goals and address critical planning and infrastructure issues
• Ensure that development of EPR includes establishing efficient refurbishment and repair
- retaining the form and function of products and ensuring redesign of products and
packaging
• Participate in developing and expanding regional, statewide, and national
medialmessaging campaigns to advance awareness and support for Zero Waste and
sustainability principles such as system re-design, highest and best use of energy and
materials, and a closed-loop sustainable production and consumption society
• Continue leadership in development of a California Product Stewardship Council to shift
California's product waste management system from one focused on government funded and
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 17 of 21
ratepayer financed waste diversion to one that relies on producer responsibility in order to
reduce public costs; drive improvements in product design; and foster reuse, refurbishment,
and repair
• Develop and actively pursue a strategic Zero Waste and sustainability legislative and
regulatory policy agenda, including initiatives such as:
• Replace incentives for wasting, such as existing government subsidies for virgin natural
resource extraction which put recycling and downstream resource recovery systems at a
competitive disadvantage, with policies that favor environmentally and economically
sustainable practices over wasteful, polluting, and ultimately costly practices
• Phase out use of toxic materials in products and processes as the European Union and
China have done in adopting Reduction of Hazardous Substances [ROHS] requirements
• Engage and negotiate with key retailers to provide product take back opportunities for
pharmaceuticals, universal hazardous wastes (e.g., consumer batteries), consumer electronics
(e-waste), and products
Strategy#5: Educate, Promote and Advocate a Zero Waste Sustainability Agenda
Description of Strategy .
Engage, educate, motivate and inspire diverse audiences with simple, positive, clear
communication using innovations in the message, and how it is communicated. Create
awareness, acceptance and actions toward the systematic changes necessary for a rewarding,
healthy, and sustainable future. Develop partnerships within and beyond Oakland, encouraging
and supporting alliances among a diverse range of participants. Develop, implement and
leverage new and existing relationships with other jurisdictions, agencies, business sectors, and
non-government organizations that are engaged in Zero Waste efforts or that are strategically
positioned to further Oakland's Zero Waste goals. Develop and actively pursue a strategic
legislative and regulatory policy agenda to reduce and eliminate incentives for wasting and phase
out use of toxic materials in products and processes. Champion, highlight, and celebrate success,
and "lead by example" in the City's policies and actions. Provide more extensive and consistent
information about Zero Waste and sustainability actions —what to do, how to do it, and why it is
important.
Why Strategy Selected: Even though efforts have been made in Oakland to educate the general
public and specific targeted audiences on.how and why to reduce, reuse, and recycle, many don't
participate - even where convenient recycling systems are in place. Only about 15% of eligible
residences use the food scraps service that was added to the weekly yard trimmings service in
2005. New messages and communication styles are needed that are positive and tailored to
different circumstances and cultural contexts. Zero Waste messages must encourage pursuing
effective and efficient solutions with integrity that is grounded in an understanding of how
natural systems function.
Businesses and institutions dispose of 67% of the wastes in Oakland, so a high priority needs to
be placed on better two-way communication with them, along with new rules and incentives to
provide encouragement, motivation, and rewards. The good news is that businesses embracing
Zero Waste programs save money. The open and free marketplace in Oakland for non-
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 18 of 21
residential recycling provides opportunities to increase participation through more outreach,
information resources, recognition, and more active technical assistance to achieve Zero Waste.
Zero Waste itself is an element of a larger strategy to achieve sustainability. The overall goals
and values of sustainability, such as healthy communities/healthy people, quality of life, and
public safety inform and motivate all the strategies in this flan. Achieving sustainability calls
for addressing interrelated problems with interrelated solutions, and for including all elements of
the community. It involves transforming how materials and energy are used to meet human
needs and aspirations. Current large-scale environmental challenges such as global warming and
energy shortages, are moving sustainability issues to the forefront of public attention, and raising
public interest in understanding the earth cycles and natural processes of the living world. The
challenge for sustainability messaging and education will be to show how civilization can
continue in a positive and satisfying direction while working within natural limits.
Waste reduction has a long and well-known history, and is especially well positioned to convert
public concern and awareness about sustainability into effective solutions. Zero Waste
messaging and education will generate business and public support for new consumption
patterns, product designs, and materials handling processes that offer future Oaklanders a
community and economy that meets arising needs, challenges, and aspirations with durable,
resilient solutions that are socially and environmentally beneficial. Oakland cannot achieve its
Zero Waste goal on its own, and needs to develop and leverage relationships beyond traditional
solid waste and recycling organizations by partnering and negotiating with others that have the
core competencies, strategic position, or market position to effect Zero Waste goals and
aspirations.
Recommended Next Steps to Implement Strategy:
• Outreach, Education, and Recognition
• Develop and sustain public education and promotional campaigns for existing programs
• Overhaul approach to public education and messaging to effectively communicate
`reduce, reuse, recycle' and sustainability in a way that engages, motivates and inspires:
• Incorporate "aspirational" or "higher level" values that contribute to quality of life,
health, and civic good
• Use new communications tools and new media, social marketing/branding, and social
networking including:
• Promote existing virtual communications and websites to encourage more
reuse of products through electronic marketplaces
• Develop a Yahoo group for Zero Waste Businesses in Oakland, and expand
the City's Zero Waste website W ��u��&m , with
publications, media coverage, and information coming from above activities
• Develop regional collaborations to design and place hard-hitting, high-impact,
compelling advertising effectively communicating Zero Waste sustainability in a way
that is designed to change people's behaviors
• Develop media partnerships and other strategies to highlight and celebrate achievements,
leadership, and successes; show creativity and progress; and profile businesses,
individuals, and institutions, and organizations that are contributing positively to a
sustainable City and world
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 19 of 21
• Ask sustainable businesses and other community partners in Oakland to carry the Zero
Waste message in their own terms to their own communities to help market the concepts
of Zero Waste, sustainability, and eco-literacy
• Partner with Berkeley, San Francisco, San Jose and others to promote the San Francisco
Bay Area as a national leader in sustainability, and to attract businesses and individuals
looking for sustainable living
• Develop messages to inspire and engage all City staff in supporting the City to lead by
example in eliminating wasting
• Technical Assistance
• Increase marketing and technical assistance to local businesses to adopt sustainable best
business practices to minimize waste and avoid landfill and incineration: more waste
audits, how-to guides, and periodic follow-up re: opportunities identified by waste audits
• Initiate collaborative work groups by industry sector, including local colleges, with
StopWaste.Org and others to identify common problems and challenges, and use
technical assistance teams to resolve those
• Advocacy
• Seek leadership roles and actively participate in formal and informal regional, statewide,
national, and international waste reduction and sustainability groups working to advance
Zero Waste policies
• Engage with advocacy groups that are working on legislative and social change to further
Zero Waste goals, including critical planning and infrastructure issues, such as ABAG,
EDAB, Californians Against Waste, Berkeley Ecology Center, PSI, Product Policy
Institute, Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice, National Recycling
Coalition, California Manufacturers Association, California Retailers Association,
California Grocers Association
• Lead by Example
• Adopt Zero Waste policies and practices in the City's own operations, facilities, capital
improvement and maintenance practices
• Educate all City employees on Zero Waste, and incorporate Zero Waste sustainability
targets into all City operations and functions
• Adopt an Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Policy (EPP) for City procurement that
includes EPR and an emphasis on reuse, repair, and design for disassembly, and reduced
toxicity
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 20 of 21
IV. CONCLUSION
By pursuing Zero Waste strategies Oakland can advance its goal of being a Sustainable City,
reverse growing local/regional health and financial liabilities from waste disposal, support
sustainable local economic and workforce development, and contribute to a worldwide effort to
reverse damage to the planet's natural systems. Zero Waste challenges the wasteful and
inefficient one-way system of`extract, consume and discard' and creates greater opportunity for
sustainable economic development. This Plan to reach Oakland's ambitious goal of Zero Waste
includes strategies that prioritize "upstream" solutions to prevent waste before it is created,
emphasize improving traditional "end of the pipeline" recycling programs, and identify the
critical need for public education and economic solutions. By adopting and implementing this
Plan, the City will take responsibility for its own destiny and help preserve resources and a
healthy environment for future generations to enjoy.
Strategic Plan for Zero Waste Page 21 of 21
Exhibit A: Environmental Hierarchy to Guide Oakland's Zero Waste Strategies, Policies and Actions
Zero Waste has been defined by the Zero Waste International Alliance as a philosophy and visionary goal in
which manufacturing and supply chains emulate natural cycles, where all outputs are usable inputs for other
value-added processes. It means designing products and managing materials and systems for maximum
resource conservation, highest, most efficient use, and minimum negative environmental impact. It means
eliminating harmful discharges to land, water and air, by preventing rather than managing waste and pollution.
Highest/Best Use
AL Redesign.Manufacturing & Supply Chain
Mandate Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
Produce durable,reusable, recyclable, and recycled-content products
Use environmentally sustainable feedstocks &materials
Design for repair, reconditioning, disassembly, deconstruction and recycling
Make brand owners/first importers responsible to take back products &
packaging
Reduce/Refuse/Return
Reduce Toxicity
Reduce toxic materials in products
Replace toxic materials in products with less toxic or non-toxic alternatives
Reduce Consumption
Purchase and use less
Apply Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) standards to purchasing
Reduce Packaging
Purchase products with less packaging
Incentive durable, reusable packaging
Reuse/Preserve Form&Function
Repair and recondition products
Deconstruct and salvage buildings and building products
Support thrift stores and charity collection
Recycle/Compost/Digestion
Recover&return materials to economic mainstream for remanufacture to like-
value products
Recover& return materials to economic mainstream for composting to value-
added soil amendment products
Ambient temperature (<200 degrees)processing of organic materials for
recovery of fuels and energy, with composting of residue
Down Cycle
Recover&return materials to economic mainstream for remanufacture to hon-
or marginally-recyclable products, such as office paper to tissue paper, or soda
bottles to toys or clothing
Bury/Incinerate/Waste-Based Energy
Bioreactor landfilling, when design incorporates sufficient safety &
environmental protections
"Beneficial"landfill use, such as alternative daily cover(ADC) or landfill
construction
Traditional landfilling
High-temperature, energy-intensive processing to recover fraction of embodied
energy, from non-source-separated, mixed resources, including but not limited
to: mass burn, co-firing, fluidized bed, gasification, plasma arc,pyrolysis
Lowest/Worst Use
Exhibit B
City of Oakland's Existing Recycling and Waste Reduction Programs
Residential Recycling and Waste Reduction Programs
Residential recycling was initiated in 1993 and bi-weekly yard trimmings collection was added
in 1995, and the City's 238-SAVE Recycling Hotline provides informational, service referral,
and technical assistance. Recycling costs are included in refuse rates for all residential
customers.
Single Family DwelliLigs
• In February 2005, Oakland initiated the following changes to single family recycling:
• 64-gallon cart for all recyclables replaced dual 18-gallon recycling tubs
• Weekly recycling collection extended to Southern half of City
• Weekly yard trimmings collection replaced bi-weekly collection Citywide
• Unlimited yard trimmings collection added
• Food scraps and food-soiled paper added to yard trimmings collection
• The combined changes resulted in over 35% increase in recycling and over 40% increase in
yard trimmings/food scraps
Bulky Pickup and Recycling
• Program changed in 2004 from neighborhood clean up to individual household appointments,
and added recycling of more items
• Changes resulted in a program diversion rate increase from under 10%to over 40%
Multi-Family Dwellings
• Multi-family dwellings receive carts, or in some cases metal bins, for weekly recycling
• Yard trimmings, food scraps and bulky pick-up are not offered to multi-family dwellings
Regional Waste Reduction Progrrams
• Stopwaste.org serves all Alameda County with recycling, reuse, and repair information
services through its Recycling Guide, online Recycling Wizard, and Recycling Hotline
• Stopwaste.org also provides a Bay Friendly Gardening program, which includes a long-
established home composting component offering training classes and sale of low-cost,
subsidized home composting bins
Non-Residential Recycling and Waste Reduction Proerams
Non-Residential (including commercial, industrial, and non-franchised self haul) solid waste
comprised 67% of Oakland's waste stream in 2000.'
1 2000-Alameda County Waste characterization Study&California Integrated Waste Management Board Disposal
Data
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit B: Existing Recycling and Waste Reduction Programs (continued)
Construction and Demolition Debris Waste Reduction and Recycling
• Over 2,000 new construction, commercial and apartment house demolition, and commercial
and apartment house remodeling projects have been subject to Oakland's Construction and
Demolition Debris Waste Reduction and Recycling (C&D Recycling) Ordinance since it was
adopted in 2000
• Building permit applicants are required to divert from landfill at minimum 65% of materials
from the project, including 100% of all asphalt and concrete
• Annual C&D recycling tonnage has doubled since adoption of the C&D Recycling
Ordinance, and as of 2005 exceeds 75,000 tons annually
Construction&Demolition Market Development
• Program helps recycling-based businesses secure grants and loans, obtaining sites and
permits, secure reliable supplies of recycled raw materials, and develop business plans
• Approximately 30 active RMDZ clients are in Oakland
Medium and Small Business Recycling— Services, Outreach and Technical Assistance
• Small and medium-sized businesses may receive up to two 96-gallon recycling carts for low
cost, weekly Small Business Recycling service
• The Public Works Agency actively promotes and recruits businesses to this service, as well
as targeting businesses for technical assistance for other recycling and waste reduction
opportunities
StopWaste Partnership (SWP) Collaboration
• The Public Works Agency collaborates with SWP, a program of the Alameda County Waste
Management Authority and Recycling Board (StopWaste.Org), to target Oakland's Top 100
waste generators with free waste reduction and recycling technical assistance
• Clients include nearly all of Oakland's largest commercial and institutional entities including
Oakland International Airport, airlines, hospitals, public agencies, hotels, corporations, the
Oakland Coliseum, and most recently,Eastmont Town Center
Alameda County Green Business Prop-ram Promotion
• The Alameda County Green Business Program promotes environmentally responsible
business practices, through a certification program
• 55 Oakland businesses currently certified
Commercial Organics Diversion
• 11,000 tons per year of commercial food scraps are diverted from landfill disposal by open
market recycling service providers
• The Public Works Agency is actively promoting food scraps recycling to targeted businesses
Page 2 of 2
Exhibit C
Oakland Recycling and Reuse Companies
AB&I Foundry 195 Recycles iron and casting sand; 100+yrs. Old
Arran Environmental 15 Recycles concrete and asphalt
Badger Forest Products * 8 Converts damaged paper into usable sheets,rolls
Concrete Works 12 Custom concrete countertops, fireplace surrounds, etc.
C&K Salvage * 4 2nd generation company salvages, mills large timbers
White Owl Woodworks 4 Mills reclaimed wood
St. Vincent de Paul of ALCo. * 100+ Reused.household goods, clothes; food rescue
The Reuse People * 10 Bldg. deconstruction and used construction material sales
East Bay Depot for Creative
Reuse * 20 Reclaimed items become art supplies, furniture, etc.
eCullet * 9 Startup: Optical sorting of contaminated curbside glass
Joinery Structures 30 Custom builder using salvaged urban trees
John Lewis Glass * 15 Glass casting/drilling casting/drilling to make commercial&fine art pieces
Mannequin Madness 3 Recovery and reuse/resale of store mannequins
Pacific Paper Tube * 36 100%recycled paper tubes& other product
Recycling Works 14 Document destruction firm relocated here in 2000; 14 jobs
Containers Unlimited 18 Barrel,bag, container washing and reuse
East Bay Rock, Inc. 10 Concrete/asphalt/brick recycler; sells "Envirocrete"
Owens Brockway 500+ Glass bottle/jar mfr. here since 1937;union labor
Schnitzer Steel * 100+ Publicly traded metals recycler/mfr. employs 100+here
Sutta Company * 50+ W. Oakland paper recycler, 2nd plant in Ventura, CA
Smurfit Stone Container 20 Large, international scale processor of recycled paper
National Recycling 16 Major paper recycler; 2 plants: West&East Oakland
Standard Iron and Metal 35 Metals recycling operation; relocated from 66th Ave. area
Aaron Metals 25+ Metals recycler bounded by residents; can't expand
Custom Alloy Scrap Sales 40 Large non-ferrous metals recycler; owns lots of land
Alliance Metals 15 Beverage container recycler
Super Link Plastic Inc 30 Major regional plastics reclaimer and export broker
Gallagher and Burk 35 Regional re rocessor/manufacturer of asphalt for roads, etc.
Lakeside Metals 15 Long time metals recycler,now surrounded by residential/lofts
East Bay Conservation Corps 15 Youth training program; collects recyclables from small biz's
Goodwill Industries 25 Regional processing for reused household items, clothing
Habitat for Humanity ReStore 4 Salvaged and reused bldg. material sales support H4H projects
2 recycling processing plants in West Oakland; City contractor
California Waste Solutions 50+ for residential recycling collection(northern half of City)
Universal Waste Management 1 5 lCollection of electronic and other regulated wastes
* Oakland Recycling Market Development Zone (RMDZ) grant or loan recipient