HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1991/08/15
CHANGE IN MEETING LOCATION
The Adjourned City Council Meeting scheduled for Thursday, August 15, 1991, immediately after the
Redevelopment Agency Meeting (scheduled to begin at 4:00 p.m.) will be held in the City Council
Conference Room, located in the Administration Building (next to the Mayor/Council Offices).
Uj de'r::~rc '...!n~_:~r D~!1a~tjl of r~-r:ur-j' 'that 1 am
(;'j1"':::;..~": ' tjJ 1: :: (t'f {~h~J:n V:8'~:;'1 ~:l thD
:..;:-::,~:.,..,'~~',:: '~."\.~ (':i"t:/ C'~'~'J~'~: t;rt.j .~;~:~{ ~ f~,OD'~'0d
i.~V: (~_':~n ".;~..)~i-:>.; (}il 'U-iG C/dn3'~,~:'i C-:ra:--d -t
'(:~:) 'i!'"i.;';~'Ci7": ':;OG [3,-',i;)n-; ", d
Dr,'a::L'~_~ E ;Cf L S\G~\ED .-
L
'l~
~._;i'l J;>~:.t :.~--:;.':,~.', 'r
C:'J~
C-,:"":'-
) b I'U~ I':. . ',/ -~:~-
'. .\.'
.( i."
fYfiCC/'~:;() ::ii.;/ (< ;:;; .'
:D~.~.\~';l :~'~'V~fg,\.~ \~~:ti~~!~,~r'i:!J'i' ~'~2
,r L..~ --lS ~..~~ ..._.. ./JLJI...n..;.~.... .
Thursday, August 15, 1991 . .. -..- i
4:00 p.m. * \
,~
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Adiourned MeetinS1: of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CAILED TO ORDER
1.
CALL TIlE ROll.:
Councilmembers Grasser Horton -' Malcolm -' Moore -' Rindone -'
and Mayor Nader _'
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted.
3. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TIlE DAY: None submitted.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the
Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember. a member of the public or City staff requests
that the item be puHed for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a wRequest to
Speak FormW available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff
recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Public Hearings and Oral
Communications. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
None submitted.
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBliC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak
to any item, please fill out the wRequest to Speak FormW available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form
to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual
None scheduled.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however. generally prohibits the City Council from
taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council on such a
subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form" available in the lobby
*Immedialely following the Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Agenda
-2-
August 15, 1991
ACDON ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council and staff
recommenda.tions may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out
a -Request to spealC" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. PublU:
comments are limited to five minutes.
4.
REPORT
RECYillNG STA1US - The purpose of the report is to provide an overview
of recycling program implementation to date, as well as the upcoming
decision points and necessary public hearings coming before Council over
the next year. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (City
Manager)
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
OTIIER BUSINESS
5. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
6. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
7. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to the Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, August 20, 1991 at 6:00 p.m.
in the City Council Chambers.
ITEM NUMBER ~
RESOLUTION NUMBER
ORDINANCE NUMBER
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE HAS BEEN
CONTINUED TO
SEE AGENDA PACKET
FOR THIS ITEM
ON
:ftJL ~S /qq/
{ REeye Lllv (; ST~r(/.s)
R&P~~ r S(!If1JAJN~t;)
Ati-INIJ/r
efJMP/,l'rG
COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEMENT
Item * ~
Meeting Date 171S,'~
~ \ \S\'H
ITEM TITLE:
Recycling Status Report
Stephanie Snyder, Principal Management Assistan~
Athena Lee Bradley, Conservation Coordinator ftlJ;>
City Manaqer,..JL1'~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No--1Ll
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of recycling
program implementation to date, as well as the upcoming decision points
and necessary public hearings coming before Council over the next year.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: A copy of this report has been
provided to the Resource Conservation Commission, and will be formally
reviewed at its August 12, 1991 meeting. Additionally, copies of the
report will be provided to the Growth Management Oversight Committee
and the Chula Vista 21 Committee for their information.
DISCUSSION:
Attached is an executive summary and comprehensive report on integrated
waste management activities for the City of Chula Vista, including
source reduction, recycling, and composting.
Piscal Impact: None as a result of this report.
;i-I-
~.. \
ATTACHMENT A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report will describe the current status of recycling in the City,
mandates and influences driving the City's need to implement additional
source reduction and recycling programs, and program options to meet
these mandates. It is expected that presenting such an overview in a
workshop setting will allow Council to provide general policy direction
to staff and will give Council a more comprehensive understanding about
future agenda items.
Three forces are guiding the way that Chula Vista disposes of its
waste, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939),
County landfill capacity and new amendments to the County Solid Waste
Ordinance. The County Solid Waste Ordinance presents a new issue for
Council in that it outlines specific timetables for prohibiting the
disposal of recyclable material at the County landfills.
The Ordinance specifies material types by residential, commercial and
industrial sources that must be separated from the wastestream and
recycled or composted. Chula Vista will first be impacted in March of
1992, when the City will be required to either enforce the mandatory
recycling ordinance or be subject to penalties. Enforcement is not an
issue the City has had to deal with in the past. It raises questions of
staff resources, logistics, and community opposition. It demands the
development of creative ways to educate and involve the public in a
positive way.
Chula Vista has already established a very successful single family
residential Curbside Recycling Program, as well as an Office Recycling
Program for the Civic Center. The Office Recycling Program also has a
business outreach component that will target local businesses for
assistance in establishing their own office recycling programs.
Development of future recycling programs in the City is going to be
significantly impacted by factors such as diversion requirements of AB
939 and the timeline mandated by the County Ordinance. Staff will be
developing program plans to be brought to Council for decision during
the next year. These programs include: curbside "greens" (yardwaste)
collection; backyard composting; industrial recycling; commercial
recycling; and residential multi-family. Other issues to be addressed
include: source reduction; designing for recycling (space allocation);
and procurement.
c1~
l{..Z
ATTACHKENT B
RECYCLING STATUS REPORT
INTRODUCTION
Chula Vista's "disposal" future is being directed by three powerful
forces: the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB
939), County landfill capacity and the County Solid Waste Ordinance.
There has been Council discussion and action in the past year on both
of the first two issues, the State mandates of AB 939 and the problems
associated with assuring Countywide landfill capacity. (Amore detailed
discussion of these factors is included in Attachment C.)
The most recent factor to influence the City's decisions on current and
future recycling programs has only been recently introduced: changes to
the County's Solid Waste Ordinance which outline specific timetables
for prohibiting the disposal of recyclable material at the County
landfills.
NEW INFORMATION AFFECTING LOCAL LANDFILL DISPOSAL
On June 11, 1991, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted a
"mandatory recycling ordinance", amending the County Solid Waste
Ordinance. This action is a result of a 1988 Board decision to
encourage and assist the voluntary establishment of programs which
would produce a 30 percent reduction in the amount of wastes going to
County landfills in three years. Board action to mandate recycling was
taken at this time primarily because the 30 percent reduction has not
been met voluntarily.
The Ordinance specifies material types by residential, commercial and
industrial sources that must be separated from the wastestream and
recycled or composted. It provides a timetable for phasing in the
requirements throughout the region and allows a series of warnings and
penalties. Chula Vista will first be impacted in March, 1992.
The County intends to enforce the ordinance through random inspections
of vehicles entering County-owned landfills to determine the contents
and origins of the vehicles. However, there is a provision that cities
which "adopt and diligently enforce" similar and approved recycling
ordinance provisions for solid waste collectors and generators will be
exempt from inspections and resulting fines.
If Chula Vista does not adopt and enforce a mandatory ordinance, refuse
vehicles from the City will be subject to inspections at the landfill.
Violators would then be warned, followed by fines beginning at $25.00
per truck, up to $100.00 per truck. If the violating vehicles continue
to bring mixed waste containing recyclables to the landfill, after
three warnings they will not be allowed to dump.
Enforcement is not an issue the City has had to deal with in the past.
It raises questions of staff resources, logistics, and community
opposition. It demands the development of creative ways to educate and
~
~-3
involve the public in a positive way. Some ideas include: resident,
neighborhood, and business contests to offer awards for those who
recycle; promotion of volunteer opportuni ties; and increased
involvement of block associations and other neighborhood organizations.
Additionally, outreach to area schools will promote the active use of
environmentally-oriented curriculum and activities.
Staff is also exploring other more "positive", creative and
economically viable options for encouraging program participation,
including establishment of a "volume based" rate system (e. g., variable
can). Such systems, widely used in the Pacific Northwest, set an
established refuse fee based on the size container (or weight)
generated by the customer. This method incorporates a clear incentive
for recycling and reduction of wastes.
CURRENT STATUS OF RECYCLING PROGRAMS
Up to this point, this report has provided the backdrop for explaining
the influences affecting Council's previous direction on recycling, and
those areas of concern for upcoming programs. It is now important to
focus on the success of existing programs, and plans for future source
reduction, recycling, and yard waste programs which will meet City,
County, and State goals.
Curbside Recycling
Under Council's direction, the City's Curbside Recycling Program was
expanded to all single-family attached and detached homes receiving
curbside refuse collection services in February, 1991 (approximately
22,900 households). The participation rate is excellent--82 percent 1 An
average of 260 tons of recyclables are being collected each month.
Since September, 1989, in addition to landfill space savings, over 5
millon kilowatt hours of electricity have been saved through recycling,
as well as 22,000 trees from newspaper recycling.
Resident concern with the recycling fee was expressed following the
initial expansion of the Curbside Program. Following staff explanations
regarding the necessity of recycling, the unavoidable costs that need
to be paid somehow, and the fact that money generated from the program
goes to off-set these costs, most concerned residents appeared to
understand the City's need to implement the service and charge
residents directly. Citizen complaints have become negligible and staff
continues to receive inquiries about materials, markets, etc.
Beginning August 1, 1991, the County will award "Tonnage Diversion
Grants" to all cities for the diversion of residential recyclables
(excluding yard wastes). These grants are non-competitive and will pay
$7.75 per ton awarded on a quarterly basis. Based on the average
monthly tonnage from the City's Curbside Recycling Program, these
grants could amount to approximately $24,000 the first year.
;f- 4-
~ ..~
The establishment of the diversion grant is part of the County's plan
to assist cities in generating revenue which can be used for
enforcement activities, as an alternative to fines at the landfill for
lack of enforcement.
Cit;y Office Recycling Program
The City's Office Recycling Program was formally initiated in July,
1991. Over 500 Civic Center employees are now able to recycle their
paper products, and glass, aluminum, and plastic beverage containers.
The Program is funded through a County of San Diego Technical
Assistance Program (TAP) grant for the period of one year. The Urban
Corps of San Diego, also operating under a TAP grant, will provide
weekly collection services. The grant provided funds for training
materials and supplies, including an employee handbook, decals, and
recycling bins. Staff developed and implemented the program, employee
trainings, and will monitor the program.
Also as part of the TAP grant awarded to the City, staff is developing
an office recycling guide to be distributed to area businesses. Twelve
local businesses of varying sizes will be targeted for implementation
of office recycling. A business recycling baseline will also be created
in order to track office recycling programs implemented in the City.
Staff will work with the Chamber of Commerce to market the office
recycling guide, and to begin implementation of recycling in business
offices.
FUTURE RECYCLING PROGRAMS
Curbside Recycling Program
As mandated by the County Solid Waste Ordinance, the City will need to
address the development and enforcement of a "mandatory recycling
ordinance. " The ordinance would need to be adopted and in place by
March 1, 1992. Enforce~ent of the ordinance would allow for a three
month "warning" period, to be followed by levying of fines for
noncompliance three months from enactment.
Although a detailed report on this issue will be brought forward to
Council in the near future, one option for the City under a mandatory
recycling ordinance would be to hire additional staff to enforce the
ordinance. Similar to code enforcement procedures already operating in
the City, a "Recycling Enforcement Officer" could issue a series of
warnings to individuals who do not separate their recyclables from
their trash. These warnings could be followed by a more stringent
enforcement; if violations continue, fines could ensue.
An alternative to having City staff enforce the ordinance would be to
have the hauler become the enforcing agent. This option would have the
benefit of having fewer direct costs to the City, however, it could
potentially impact refuse collection costs that are already rapidly
increasing. An enforcement mechanism using a combination of both
options may also be viable.
;fS
4 - <;-
Staff will be developing a mandatory source reduction and recycling
ordinance over the next two months. This ordinance would apply to all
sectors of the City--residential, industrial, and commercial. It will
specifically outline which materials must be recycled wi thin each
sector, as well as the County's timeline for implementation of
recycling programs. Also contained in the ordinance will be the
recommended method of enforcement. Because of the sensitive nature of
such an ordinance, staff will take steps to ensure widespread public
notification of the intended action, including the Chamber of Commerce,
major businesses, etc.
As fulfillment toward AS 939, it is expected that the single-family
Curbside Recycling Program will divert approximately 4 percent of the
wastestream by 1995. The high participation in the program will clearly
continue to benefit the City as it implements recycling in other
sectors. As office workers, restaurant and construction employees and
others are asked to recycle, many individuals will react with
enthusiasm because they are already accustomed to "separating their
wastes."
Key Issues, Decisions and Action Dates:
*
Mandatory Recycling Ordinance
November, 1991
*
Enforcement
March, 1992
"Greens" Re~cling
The separation of yardwaste ("greens") for mulching, composting, and/or
as a biofuel, is a simple, and cost-effective method for reducing a
significant portion of the municipal solid wastestream. Yard waste
comprises about 20 percent of the wastestream.
As required under the County Ordinance, greens collection for single-
family and multi-family dwellings must begin by January, 1992.
Collection must be curbside (for single-family), but does not have to
be once per week, as with residential recycling. Thus, if the City
concluded that curbside collection every other week would meet the
needs of the City, this is allowed.
Several options are available for program design. One of the most cost-
effective approaches is one in which residents place a special decal on
a container (provided by the resident) and place the container onto
the sidewalk next to their recycling and refuse containers. It is
estimated that the costs associated with residential greens collection
runs between $1.50-to-$2.00 per household. Markets for the mulched or
composted material are still in their infancy, but are nonetheless
growing. As consumer interest in "organically" grown foods increases,
reliance on natural compost instead of petroleum based synthetic
fertilizers should rise.. Additionally, the increased use of
alternative, cleaner fuels, including "bio-mass" will improve the
market for yard and wood wastes.
C11 ,,~
4 -~
As directed by Council, staff has drafted a Request for Proposals in
order to contract for collection (and processing) of separated
residential yard wastes. It is anticipated that the RFP will be
distributed toward the end of fall, with a proposal to begin a phased-
in residential single-family greens recycling program by June of next
year. The RFP would also include the collection of greens from multi-
family units, to be phased-in under the County Ordinance mandated
timeline.
Enforcement of yard waste recycling under the County Ordinance is to
begin January 1, 1993. Through public education and ease of service
(i. e ., weekly or bi-weekly curbside collection) public opposition
should be minimal. Other cities that have instituted yard waste
collection have a very positive response from citizens who are usually
eager not to have such a large volume of materials end up in the
landfill. It is anticipated that greens recycling will divert 8 percent
of the City's wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
Key Issues, Decisions and Action Dates:
*
Request for Proposals
November, 1991
*
Enforcement
January, 1993
Backyard Composting Program
Voluntary backyard composting is a low-staff, no-cost approach toward
waste reduction. It will also help to promote "greens" recycling
through "getting the word out" about yard waste recycling in the City.
Through fliers, residents can be informed about the benefits of
backyard composting, and the availability of composting bins. Residents
can then fill out a coupon on the flier to order a composting bin from
a local vendor. Composting bins can be sold at cost to residents, and
come with an instruction guide.
Staff could work with community garden clubs, homeowner and renter
associations and other civic clubs to promote backyard composting, and
even community composting at neighborhood ,gardens. Although voluntary,
all backyard composting activity will assist toward meeting the City's
AB 939 diversion goals and help meet the County's mandates.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action Dates:
*
Begin Implementation of Pilot Program
October, 1991
InduBtria~ Recyc~ing Program
Industrial recycling poses different challenges for implementation than
do other recycling programs in the City. Due to the diverse nature of
industrial wastes, recycling for this sector is not conveniently "put
out to bid." Standardization of recycling collection is not practical,
as most industries haul their own refuse to the landfill or recyclers.
;19--
Lf-l
Staff plans to develop an industrial recycling guide for distribution
to all area businesses. Information to be contained in the guide will
include a listing of the recyclable materials designated under the
County Ordinance and a listing of local recyclers. Staff will also be
developing a "Materials Exchange Program" through which industries
could list waste products that may be utilized by other industries in
their manufacturing processes.
The County has reported a sharp increase in the recycling of
construction and demolition wastes since the landfill disposal fee was
applied to containers and trucks by weight, instead of volume. For most
clean loads of construction debris, recycling is a more cost effective
alternative. As the disposal fee continues to rise, this should
increase industry recycling even further.
Enforcement for industrial recycling will begin October 1, 1992. Staff
will work directly with the industries, the Chamber of Commerce, and
industry associations in order to gain cooperation from local
industries. Additionally, as noted above, the secondary materials
market for demolition and construction materials is relatively strong.
This will provide a strong incentive to industries to recycle.
It is anticipated that industrial recycling will divert 6 percent of
the City's wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action Dates:
*
Enforcement
October, 1992
. Commercial Recycling Program
Commercial recycling will create many special challenges to staff. The
diversity of offices, restaurants, and other hospitality and service
establishments will necessitate recycling programs that can be both
implemented on a City-wide scale, but yet are "tailored" to each
individual establishment. Large, medium, and small businesses all have
special needs stemming from the size and nature of the establishment,
in addition to the diversity of recyclable materials generated.
As directed by Council, staff will be exploring the option of going to
bid for collection services for commercial establishments.
Several options exist:
1) An RFP could be awarded to a single provider of services;
2) An RFP could be awarded to multiple providers, e. 9 ., one
provider could offer services to all restaurants, another to all
motels, another to offices, or the city could be divided up in
quadrants, awarding contracts to collectors by quadrant;
3) No RFP would be developed, leaving open opportunities for all
service providers to compete on a "free market" basis.
~~
L{ .. <i'
Each option has certain advantages. Awarding a contract to a single
provider would allow the City to closely monitor the recycling
activities of area businesses. Additionally, the City could collect
franchise fees for the service. Having multiple providers under
contract would potentially provide these same advantages.
With the number and diversity of commercial establishments in the City,
an open system may be prove advantages from a staff perspective, as it
would require less monitoring of contract compliance, legalities, etc.
The City of San Diego uses an open system for commercial recycling
which seems to be meeting the needs of the business community well.
Many of the major office complexes in the San Diego are recycling, with
a variety of haulers offering services.
Allowing the "free market" to work in offering recycling services to
commercial establishments would still allow staff to monitor recycling
activities, through the database on business recycling in the City
being developed under this year's TAP grant award. Services provided to
commercial establishments may be more tailored made to the particular
establishment, since businesses would be able to choose the vendor to
best suit their needs.
Enforcement of commercial recycling in the City under the County
Ordinance is to begin July 1, 1993. Enforcement of commercial recycling
in the City will require creative planning and implementation. Staff
will develop a comprehensive public relations campaign targeting area
businesses. The campaign will focus on the benefits of recycling,
including reduced disposal costs, environmental awareness, and positive
public image.
Through the City's current TAP grant award, staff has begun to develop
an ongoing dialogue with the Chamber of Commerce. During the fall of
this year, staff will begin to work directly with area businesses in
establishing recycling programs, offering advise and consultation where
needed. Working closely with the business community will be the only
way to achieve compliance with the mandatory ordinance.
It is anticipated that commercial recycling will divert 5 percent of
the City's wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action 'Dates:
*
RFP Decision
January, 1992
*
Enforcement
July, 1993
;;( 9""-
L\~~
Residen1:ial Jlul1:i-family Recycling Program
The establishment of recycling collection services for residential
multi-family units will require a great deal of advanced planning and
careful implementation. As with commercial establishments, multi-family
dwelling units vary in terms of size, design, and demographics. These
characteristics all impact the type of collection services that can be
offered.
As directed by Council, staff will be exploring the option of going to
bid for collection services for multi-family establishments.
As with commercial recycling, several options exist:
1) An RFP could be awarded to one, single provider of services;
2) An RFP could be awarded to multiple providers, e.g., the City
could be divided up in quadrants, awarding contracts to collectors
by quadrant;
3) No RFP would be developed, leaving open opportunities for all
service providers to compete on a "free market" basis.
Again, as with commercial recycling each option would have certain
advantages. Because the City's single-family residential recycling
program has been awarded to a one hauler, it may be prudent to award
multi-family recycling to one hauler as well. Additionally, the large
percentage of multi-family housing in the City may be best serviced by
one or a few designated providers.
Dividing the City into service quarters and awarding a contract to a
single provider for each quarter would allow for more competitive
bidding and services, but still allow for contractual accountability.
Addi tionally , this could provide for more expedi ted program
implementation, as opposed to a single hauler attempting to provide
service to the entire City.
Enforcement for residential multi-family recycling under the County
Ordinance is scheduled to begin July 1, 1993. In order to take
advantage of the Tonnage Diversion Grants offered by the County,
however, the City may wish to begin pilot projects in residential
multi-family units prior to that date. It is anticipated that
approximately 4 percent of the City's wastestream will be diverted
through a residential multi-family recycling program to meet the AB 939
mandates.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action Dates:
*
RFP Decision
January, 1992
*
Enforcement
July, 1993
d- / "&-
4-ID
,_.,,~-,,~..,._,,-_._-"-----~">"--~"."--"-""-"-"'-'-"'-.---
Source Reduct;ion
All of the City's recycling and composting programs will incorporate
source reduction. Staff will promote waste reduction ideas and
guidelines in its public and business awareness campaigns. Guidebooks
developed for commercial and industrial recycling programs will contain
specific outlines on source reduction options.
Designing for Recycling
As part of the City's comprehensive approach to waste management, staff
will develop guidelines for space allocation and design to allow for
recycling at multi-family dwellings, and commercial and industrial
establishments. An ordinance requiring the design for space allocation
will also be formulated.
Procurement;
"Closing the loop" is an essential component of any comprehensive
recycling program. Many paper products containing recycled content are
now being purchased for use by the City. Staff is developing an
ordinance to expand upon this current use, both in terms of the
diversity of recycled products purchased, and the volume. As part of
the City's Office Recycling Program, all employees are being informed
about the importance of using recycled products.
County Technical Assist;ance Program Grant Proposal
Staff is developing a grant proposal under the 1992-93 funding period
for the County's Technical Assistance Program. The proposal will
request funds to expand upon the City's current business outreach
recycling project (funded under this year's TAP), targeting additional
businesses for office recycling program establishment, and
incorporating projects to serve the hospitality sector, and area
industries.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action Dates:
* Adoption of Resolution Supporting the Grant
Proposal August, 1991
CONCLUSION
The ideas, issues, and programs discussed in this report will be placed
on a City Council agenda for action in individual reports and public
hearings over the next year. This presentation shows the relationship
between the issues and resulting decisions. It also provides some
background reference material for the future agenda items. (See
Attachment D.) In conclusion, it should give a framework for
stimulating thoughts on policy direction and preparation for further
discussion on the future of recycling in Chula Vista.
LJ"II
0( -/Jf-
ATTACHMENT C
Kev Factors AXfectinG RecvclinG ProGrams in Chula Vista
'J!he California Int;egrat;ed Jiast;e Jlanagement; Act; of 1989 (AB 939)
In October, 1989, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of
1989 (AB 939) was enacted. This law requires cities to playa primary
role in solid waste management. AB 939 mandates that all cities and
counties divert 25 percent of the wastestream being disposed at
landfills by 1995, and 50 percent by 2000. Under the law, penalties of
up to $10,000 per day can be levied by the state against jurisdictions
failing to prepare and adopt reasonable plans and programs designed to
achieve these goals, as well as failing to achieve the goals.
Cities are required to prepare and adopt two plans by January 1, 1992:
A Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and a Household
Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE). These "elements" will then be included
in a County-wide Integrated Waste Management Plan to be submitted to
the state by January 1, 1994. The County's plan will include elements
from all cities and a Countywide facility siting plant to provide
disposal capacity.
When complete, the City's SRRE and HHWE documents will present a
comprehensive analysis of Chula Vista's current wastestream generation
and disposal methods. The reports will fully describe proposed plans to
reduce the City's waste generation by the mandated 25 percent and 50
percent goals, as scheduled. The plans will include source reduction,
recycling, composting and landfilling programs for all sectors of the
City--residential, industrial, and commercial.
Count;y Landfill Capaci'ty
All cities in San Diego County (with the exception of San Diego) are
served by a system of County owned and operated, subregionally-Iocated
landfills. Uniform disposal fees provide incentive for users to access
the most conveniently located landfill at the least expensive transport
cost. Countywide landfill lifespan is currently around 10 years.
Serving Chula Vista and other South Bay cities, the Otay Landfill is
scheduled to reach capacity by 1998.
Over the past three years the County has increased disposal fees
("tipping fees") by approximately 25 percent each year, bringing the
fee to the current $23.00 per ton. As landfills throughout the County
near closure, new sites are sought, and other revenues are generated
from the disposal fees (including recycling surcharges), the fees are
expected to continue to rise at least $5.00 per ton per year.
Additionally, landfilling as a disposal option will become increasingly
more costly as distances ~rom urban areas to disposal sites are
increased; transportation costs rise due to air quality mandates
(including potential requirements for the use of alternative fuels);
land prices continue to rise; and, environmental regulations become
4 ../l
;;(/~
increasingly more difficult and
"NIMBYism" and community concern
impacts.
costly to mitigate.
will compound all of
Moreover,
the above
The implementation of comprehensive source reduction, recycling and
composting programs will increase the options available to the City for
its disposal future. Diverting recyclable materials from Otay will
potentially increase the life of the landfill.
Comprehensive source reduction, recycling and composting programs also
allow for more local control over an issue that will continue
to dramatically impact the City. These programs create relatively
"clean", beneficial jobs locally, in collection ~nd processing. Unlike
landfilling, recycling and composting operations are relatively
environmentally inert. Community opposition to recycling operations is
usually not pervasive.
Although landfill disposal will always be necessary, through reducing
our need to landfill, we decrease our dependence on County-owed
disposal facilities, relying instead on more locally-based
alternatives. More revenues will thus stay in the hands of local
businesses. Local control over programs will also be more directly
accountable for costs, requiring creative funding and program
development, but in the long run more stable costs.
4-/3:>
;<-j 3-
ATTACHKEHT D
Chronoloav of Kev Action Dates
for City Council Review
1991
Public
Bearing
August
(AB 939)Local Enforcement Agency Designation -
Letter of Intent to State
October
Technical Assistance Program (TAP)
Grant Application
(AB 939) preliminary Draft Elements
(SRRE & HHWE)
x
Backyard Composting Program - Pilot Program
Implementation
November
Mandatory Source Separation ("Recycling")
Ordinance/Enforcement Program
x
"Green" Material program-RFP
December
(AB 939) Adoption of Final SRR and
HHW Elements
x
1992
January
Multi-Family Recycling Program - RFP
April
Commercial Recycling Program - RFP Decision*
"Green Material" Recycling Program - Contract Award
x
July
Multi-family Recycling Program - Contract Award
x
* May involve formal Council Review or public hearing depending on decision.
cJ~ii-
L{ - /~