Description: Description: bwwide-R

City Council Report



City Council Meeting: March 19, 2013

Agenda Item:  4-A


To:               Mayor and City Council


From:           Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works


Subject:        Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan



Recommended Action


Staff recommends that the City Council review and comment on the draft Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan and direct staff to proceed with next steps.


Executive Summary


In 2009, the City began a Zero Waste Strategic Planning process to identify the new policies, programs and infrastructure that will enable the City to reach its Zero Waste goal of 95% diversion by 2030, or a per capita disposal rate of 1.1 pounds per person per day.  The Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan will help the City strengthen its existing diversion operations while addressing significant fiscal challenges and emerging trends and technologies. The Plan will serve as a broad environmental and policy framework and guide the future development of the City’s resource recovery and recycling policies, programs, and infrastructure.


Staff, private partners and consultants have conducted analysis, research and public outreach while developing the draft of the Zero Waste Strategic Plan.  The draft Plan includes guiding principles, programs, and identifies impacts to existing rate structures through the Year 2030.  The goal in 2030 is to divert 95% of all waste generated within Santa Monica from landfills.  Currently, 77% of all waste generated is diverted from landfills. The Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan lists diversion goals and programs necessary to achieve the 95% diversion goal in three planning categories:  Short Term Goals (2013 – 2015); Medium Term Goals (2016 – 2022); Long Term Goals (2023 – 2030).   Potential diversion programs, costs and effect on rate structure and greenhouse gas emissions impacts are all identified categories in the Plan.





The City of Santa Monica prides itself on being an environmental leader.  The City’s state-of-the-art waste diversion strategies contributed to the City reaching a 74% diversion rate in 2009.  As another indicator of the City’s diversion accomplishments, the City’s calculated per capita disposal rate in 2010 was 3.6 pounds per person per day, well below the state targeted rate of 10.9 pounds per person per day.  On June 23, 2009, Council directed staff to develop a Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan to strengthen and refine the City’s current waste diversion operations.


The City established the Zero Waste Planning Committee to effectively design and implement a zero waste program.  This Committee was comprised of the Resource Recovery & Recycling Division (RRR), the Office of Sustainability and the Environment (OSE), Southern California Disposal and Allan Company. The committee recommended that a consultant would be needed to develop a long term Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan which would identify new and expanded operational programs, including producer responsibility, product stewardship, client responsibility, Council ordinances and resolutions as well as identifying impacts of all programs on future materials processing requirements and disposal rates.  Council awarded a contract to HDR Engineering, Inc. on November 22, 2011 to develop a long term Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan.


The Zero Waste Strategic Planning process included the following tasks:

1.  Review and summary of current policies, programs, facilities, and rate structure.

2.  Review and compilation of existing zero waste principles in the industry, and development of zero waste guiding principles relevant to the City.

3.  Compilation of existing and projected waste generation and composition data.

4.  Identification, evaluation, and selection of policy, program, and infrastructure options.

5.  Calculation of potential diversion and greenhouse gas emission reductions.

6.  Analysis of program costs and rate structure impacts.





I.                What Is Zero Waste?

Zero waste is a change of perspective.  It requires rethinking what is traditionally regarded as trash and instead treating all materials as valued resources.  Zero waste entails shifting consumption patterns, more carefully managing purchases, and maximizing the reuse of materials at the end of their intended use.  Achieving zero waste entails encouraging the City, its residents, businesses, and visitors to reevaluate what is considered waste, and to maximize the recovery and reuse of the commodities to the maximum extent possible. 


The proposed Plan’s Zero Waste goal is to achieve a 95% landfill diversion rate or a per capita disposal rate of 1.1 pounds per person per day by 2030.


II.              Guiding Principles

The Santa Monica Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan (Plan) is based on ten Guiding Principles that provide a framework for the policies, programs and actions identified for implementation. These Zero Waste Guiding Principles are consistent with the Guiding Principles developed for the Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan.  The Guiding Principles were presented to the public at the Santa Monica Festival in May 2012. Nearly 400 residents provided input during the event.  The top three priorities identified by residents were: healthy communities; waste reduction; and education and outreach. 


These priorities are integrated in the Guiding Principles detailed below:

1.  The Health of the Community and the Environment Guides all Policy Decisions

2.  The Hierarchy for Managing Discarded Materials is to Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and then Recovery

3.  Economic and Social Benefits are Integral to Zero Waste

4.  The City Leads By Example

5.  Brand Owners, Producers and Manufacturers Contribute to the Management of their Products and Packaging

6.  Regional Partnerships Leverage the City’s Efforts in Pursuing Zero Waste

7.  Municipal Management of Local Collections and Processing Programs Ensures Local Control and Responsiveness

8.  Education, Outreach and Marketing are Essential to Achieving Cultural Change

9.  Research and Development of New Technologies, Collection Systems and Infrastructure are Needed to Maximize Diversion of Discarded Materials

10. Local Market Development for Reusable and Recyclable Materials Ensures Sustainability


III.            Goal Areas, Indicators and Targets

The Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan is organized around six goal areas:


1.  Waste Reduction

2.  Environmental Benefits

3.  Economic Benefits

4.  City Leadership

5.  Producer Responsibility

6.  Zero Waste Culture Change


Specific goals are established in each goal area representing what Santa Monica must achieve in order to become a Zero Waste community. For each goal, indicators have been developed to measure progress toward meeting the goals.  The indicators will help determine the impact of a program, policy or action, and when tracked over time, will reflect the accomplishments and challenges of implementing the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan.  The indicators will measure the performance or effectiveness of specific policies or programs, and will be used to determine the need for future modifications to the Plan.  For some goals, numeric targets have been established to further evaluate the accomplishments of the Plan.  The goal areas, indicators and targets are listed in Table 1-1.



      Table 1-1

Goal Area/Indicator


1.  Waste Reduction

·        Total citywide generation (also report per capita and by sector)

• Amount landfilled

• Amount diverted (recycled and        composted, etc.) from landfill

·        80% diversion by 2015

·        95% diversion by 2030

·        Per capita disposal rate of less than 3.6 pounds/person/day by 2022

·        Per capita disposal rate of less than 1.1 pounds/person/day by 2030

2.  Environmental Benefits

·        Greenhouse gas emissions reduction through waste reduction and recycling programs

·        Conversion of City RRR fleets to clean fuels/renewable


·        30% contribution to greenhouse gas reduction goal through waste prevention and recycling by 2015

·        50% contribution to greenhouse gas reduction goal through waste prevention and recycling by 2022

·        100% of all City RRR fleet vehicles to clean fuels by 2030

3.  Economic Benefits

·        Creation of new jobs

·        Local market development

·        20% increase in local jobs from waste prevention and recycling

·        Local market development

o  3 new local partnerships by 2015

o  5 new partnerships by 2022

4.  City Leadership

·        Zero waste at City offices and facilities

·        Establish baseline

·        Recycling and composting at all City facilities by 2015

·        80% diversion rate at City facilities by 2015

·        95% diversion rate at City facilities by 2030

5.  Producer Responsibility

·        Producer responsibility for problem products (advocacy at state level or implementation of City ordinances)


·        State legislation or City ordinance to address pharmaceuticals, sharps, batteries, fluorescent bulbs by 2022

·        State legislation to address packing of products and additional disposal fees for packaging materials.

6.  Zero Waste Culture Change

·        Customer participation and reduced contamination

·        Zero waste awareness at home, at work, at school, at play

·        80% participation for residents in City programs by 2015

·        90% participation for all customers in City programs by 2022

·        100% participation for all customers in City programs by 2030

·        Contamination reduced to 2% by 2015

·        Contamination reduced to 1% by 2022

·        80% of residents and businesses aware of Zero Waste by 2015

·        90% of residents and businesses aware of Zero Waste by 2022


IV.            Existing Waste Generation , Diversion and Disposal

Analyzing the City’s waste generation provides an understanding of which areas to target in the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan.  In 2011, the city’s generation, as calculated by the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), was approximately 360,000 tons of materials.  Out of the total tons generated, 77% was diverted through waste prevention, recycling, and composting, and 23% was disposed in landfills or waste-to-energy facilities. 


The total amount of materials generated is calculated using the city’s average generation rate from the years 2003 through 2006.  This methodology is consistent with the CalRecycle per capita disposal equivalent methodology (as set forth in state statute).  The city’s 2011 per capita disposal was 5.0 pounds per person per day (PPD).  Compared to the state’s per capita disposal target of 10.9 PPD, the City was well under the target goal. 


The city’s overall 2011 generation is: 





82,997 tons

275,355 tons

358,351 tons


In 2011, 82,997 tons of materials were disposed in landfills or processed at waste-to-energy facilities.  Commercial waste comprised approximately 50% of the disposed waste, multi-family residential waste comprised almost 25%, and single-family residential waste made up 8%.  The remaining disposal consisted of self-haul construction and demolition (C&D) debris.


A summary of the disposed waste is provided in Table 1-2.


                                                                                                                                                      Table 1-2



SF Residential


MF Residential




Self-Haul (City controlled)


Self-Haul (Not City controlled)








Understanding the types and quantities of materials that make up the discarded materials generated in the city is an important element of the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan.  The data helps guide the development and selection of policies, programs and facilities, and to target specific material types and/or products.  Since discarded materials vary by user, it is important to analyze the materials generated by each sector.


V.              Disposal and Population Projections

Low and high population forecasts were provided in the City’s 2010 Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE).   The forecasts used for the disposal projections are an average of the low and high population estimates from the LUCE.   As shown in Table 1-3, the average 5-year percentage increase between 2010 and 2030 is 1.31%, and the 20 year cumulative growth is 5.23%.  



                                                                                                         Table 1-3








20 year Cumulative % Change

Average Growth







% change-5 yr.










The disposal projection for the city was calculated based on population growth projections and waste composition data.  Overall, it is anticipated that the waste disposal will increase by over 3,836 tons between 2013 and 2030, which represents an increase of approximately 226 tons per year. The commercial sector is expected to contribute an additional 109 tons per year to the disposal waste stream from 2013 to 2030.  The multi-family residential sector disposal is expected to increase by 56 tons per year through 2030; the single-family residential sector disposal is expected to increase approximately 19 tons per year; and the self-haul sector by 42 tons per year.  Utilizing this data the types and quantities of materials that potentially can be source reduced, recycled, and/or composted have been identified for each waste sector in the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan. 


VI.            List of Potential Options

To meet its Zero Waste goal, the City would implement new and expanded policies, programs and infrastructure during the short term (2013–2015), medium term (2016–2022) and long term (2023-2030).  Policy, program, and facility options included opportunities to improve existing programs, as well as establish new programs to increase diversion. 


A list of 33 options was developed for review and evaluation and collapsed into six categories.  The options are categorized as follows:

1.     Mandatory - Policies or programs that are compulsory (such as meeting a diversion requirement) or prohibit an activity (such as a disposal or use ban).

2.     Collection - Programs for the collection of residential and commercial food scraps, recyclables, and bulky items.

3.     Rate Setting – Revised fee structures to account for basic and additional services, for single-family, multi-family, and commercial sectors.

4.     Upstream – Policies and programs to support re-design strategies to reduce the volume and toxicity of discarded products and materials, and promote low-impact or reduced consumption lifestyles.

5.     Downstream – Policies and programs to address reuse, recycling and composting of end-of-life products and materials to ensure their highest and best use.

6.     Facilities – Local and regional, existing and new, resource recovery facilities for processing recyclables, residuals, and other materials for beneficial use and energy recovery.


1.     Mandatory

Mandatory requirements, new rules, and ordinances can be very effective strategies for achieving Zero Waste. The City would support these efforts through technical assistance, outreach and education, and reinforcement of desired behaviors.  Descriptions of these strategies are:

·       Disposal bans on items such as plastic water bottles, cardboard, yard trimmings and construction and demolition debris as these items can be recycled, have available end-uses, and should not be disposed. 

·       A revision of the C&D Ordinance to increase the diversion requirement from 70% to 95% by the year 2030. An amendment to the C&D ordinance would be required to implement the increased diversion requirements.

·       Adoption of mandatory diversion rates for single-family, multi-family, commercial, and government sectors by ordinance.  The diversion mandates would be implemented in a phased approach.

·       Adoption of mandatory recycling in hotels/motels by ordinance would require all hotels and motels to implement a recycling program in guest rooms and common areas.


2.     Collection

The following is a list of potential collection initiatives to be implemented by the City.

·       Require Commercial Food Scraps Collection to motivate all commercial generators within the city to separate organic materials from the waste generated at a business, and place it in the appropriate organics collection container on a regular basis for collection. To effect this change, the City would need to encourage behavioral change through education and outreach to assist waste generators to separate organics from other waste, and set the organics out for collection. 

·       Require Residential Food Scraps and Other Organics Collection to motivate all residential generators within the city to separate organic materials from the waste they generate at home, and place these materials in the green collection container on a regular basis for collection. To effect this change, the City would need to encourage behavioral change through education and outreach to assist waste generators to separate organics from other waste, and set the organics out for collection.  

·       Expand Mandatory Commercial Recycling based upon the existing requirements of AB 341. This is intended to motivate all commercial waste generators within the city to separate recyclable materials from the waste generated at a business, and place it in the appropriate blue bin or recycling collection container on a regular basis for collection. To effect this change, the City would need to develop and adopt a “Recycling” ordinance that requires waste generators to source separate recyclables from other waste, and set the recyclables out for collection.  The recycling ordinance would need to be carefully developed based on consideration of potential impacts to business and customers, consistent with City policy directives.

·       Require Recycling of New Materials, which allows the City to establish collection programs for materials currently not collected in the blue bins from residential customers, including mattresses, carpet, and textiles.   The City would work with processors and representatives of the recycling industry to identify market opportunities in the Southern California region for various materials that could be recycled. 

·       Weekly Organics and Recycling Collection; Bi-weekly Refuse Collection would reduce the collection frequency of trash to every other week, while maintaining recycling and organics collection at once per week.  The program would be implemented initially for single-family residences, and phased in later for multi-family residences.  The City would need to ensure that there is sufficient processing capacity in the region to handle the increased organics tonnages that would be collected through the expanded green bin program. 

It is anticipated the program would result in an increase in waste diversion, as organics comprise 47% of the single-family disposed waste stream, and 43% of the multi-family disposed waste stream.  Reduced operations costs are also anticipated based on results in other communities that have tested every other week refuse collection (e.g. Renton, Tacoma, and Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon).  Other benefits of the program include fewer collection truck trips, which would reduce vehicle air, noise and greenhouse gas emissions, and increased collection efficiency in terms of labor time, and maintenance.

·        Wet/Dry Collection would transition from the every other week collection of trash to re-route existing residential and commercial collections to keep “wet” discards (which include yard trimmings, food scraps and soiled paper, manure and other materials that decompose) separate from “dry” discards, such as paper, glass, etc. Wet discards would be collected for processing through composting or anaerobic digestion, and dry products and materials would be reused, repaired or recycled.  This can also reduce disposal fees and increase revenues from the sale of recyclables due to the increase tons of materials recovered.  It is anticipated the wet/dry collection would increase diversion by about 8% in the residential sector, and 6% in the commercial sector.  Before this program could be implemented on a citywide basis, the City would need to ensure that there is sufficient processing capacity in the region to handle the increased recyclables and organics that would be collected.

·       Bulky Item Collection; Move-in/Move-out Program would be implemented to provide excess waste pickup resources services for multi-family residents moving in/out of their homes.  The City would collaborate with reuse entities (thrift stores, repair shops, and non-profits such as Goodwill Industries, Salvation Army, St. Joseph’s Center, and American Cancer Society Discovery Shop) to repair, reuse, and resell appropriate bulky items that are currently being set out by residents for collection and landfilled.


3.     Rate Setting

The existing fees collected by the City pay for more than just refuse collections and disposal.  Fees pay for collection and processing of recyclables, food scraps, yard debris and bulky items, as well as equipment, infrastructure, container replacements, support services, alternative technology studies.  Changes to the rate structure can have a significant effect in motivating customers to participate in new programs, and to account for basic services and additional services. 

·       Implement Single-Family Integrated Waste Management Fee Structure to more accurately account for basic services and additional services.  The fee structure would be based on all of the commodities serviced: waste, recycling and organics. The fee structure would also provide further incentives for customers to increase recycling and reduce disposal.  The advantages of this type of fee structure are increased diversion and decreased disposal, and a potential reduction in collections costs for the City collections operations.  It is anticipated this type of fee structure would result in a 4% increase in diversion in the single-family sector.

·       Implement Multi-Family and Commercial Sector Integrated Waste Management Fee Structure to establish sufficient customer rate incentives for commercial and multi-family refuse customers to increase recycling and decrease refuse service. The fee structure would be based on all of the commodities serviced: waste, recycling and organics.


Refuse rate component:  Commercial customer rates would be modified to reflect a uniform “per cubic yard” rate for the whole range of bin or container sizes and collection frequency offered to customers.  The amount of the cubic yard (unit) rate would be established to ensure that sufficient revenues are generated to cover the City’s costs.  For example, the City would charge a rate of $100 for a one cubic-yard bin collected once per week, the rate would be $200 for the one cubic-yard bin collected two times per week, $400 for a four cubic-yard bin collected once per week, or $1,200 for a six cubic yard bin collected two times per week.

Recycling rate component: A recycling rate would be established under this fee structure, as measured by the full service costs for recycling materials. Based upon the quantity of recycling, this rate could be less than the refuse rate.


4.     Upstream

·       Extended Producer Responsibility calls for the City to take an active role and work with various federal, state and regional agencies and community groups in advocating for legislation that requires product manufacturers, retail establishments, wholesale distributors and other appropriate entities to take back certain products or packaging that currently are difficult to recycle, contain toxics or otherwise pose problems when they are discarded as waste.

·       Packaging Legislation advocates for packaging legislation making businesses responsible for their packages, including alternatives to expanded polystyrene containers, “peanuts” and “blocks” and plastic bags (statewide); and support for reusable shipping containers.

·       Behavior Change Marketing by undertaking a large scale media or social marketing campaign to significantly increase awareness of its existing and planned Zero Waste programs.


5.     Downstream

·       Expand Single-use Carry-out Bag and Disposable Container Ordinance would set a goal date to expand the program to all retailers and restaurants.  Expansion of the bans would further help to reduce the amount of plastic that ends up on the city’s beaches, reduce materials that go to the landfill, and reduce the amount of natural resources used to manufacture and transport the disposable products.


·       Multi-family Recycling Educational Outreach would provide enhanced technical assistance to owners and managers of multi-family complexes in order to encourage them to initiate or expand recycling and waste reduction practices at their complexes, and to make tenants aware of the move-in/move-out program. 

·       Self-haul Waste Origin Reporting is intended to establish regional cooperation between cities, counties, and facilities that are responsible for reporting the origin of waste. 

·       Regional Sustainability Collaboration would form the basis for establishing regional Zero Waste goals throughout Southern California as well as identify opportunities for regional coordination and to undertake project-specific regional opportunities.

·       Environmental Directory On-line version would create an on-line only version of the Directory, eliminating the print version entirely.  The on-line version would include new and/or updated resources, and would be made available and searchable on the City’s website. 

·       Rewards Program would expand the City’s recognition by rewarding residents and businesses for developing programs in the city for reusing, repurposing, reducing, and recycling of waste.  The program may stimulate local job growth and markets for recovered materials, creating a new reuse industry in the city. 

·       Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Collection at Public Events would entail placement and servicing of HHW collection containers at public events, and City events such as the Santa Monica Festival.

·       Expand Items Collected In Recycling Cart would add new materials to the existing list of materials that can be placed in the recycling cart for collection by the City, including textile and other items.  Adding new materials would reduce the quantity of materials being disposed.

·       Centralized Garage Sales would establish a program for residents to sell items in a centralized location, in lieu of the many garage sales that are typically held in the city.  It is the intent of the program to encourage more residents to resell and reuse items before discarding them, and provide residents with limited space an opportunity to sell their items. 

·        Business and Restaurant Food Donation would help businesses and restaurants to find resources that accept food donations.


6.     Facilities

·       Regional Resource Recovery Center (RRCs) can be small centers for drop-off of hard to recycle items, including mattresses, large blocks of Styrofoam, and textiles, or much larger facilities that include a reuse yard for building materials, and provide repair and refurbishment for reusable bulk items and other reusable materials delivered by the public.  They can also handle HHW materials, brush, and other recoverable materials. Reduced tipping fees at RRCs can provide a significant incentive to users.  Most provide drop-off or buyback options for revenue-generating recyclables.  Some charge lower rates for certain items (e.g., yard trimmings, clean fill).  Diversion levels and costs at RRCs can vary widely depending on the extent and type of the diversion activities.

·       Alternative Technology Facilities would allow the City alternative means of processing its wet and dry materials.  A number of emerging technologies are currently under consideration or in development with the potential to provide substantial increases in diversion rates. Examples of these emerging technologies include thermal and biological processes, including anaerobic digestion, gasification, and pyrolysis. 

·       Residual Processing would consist of transforming a portion of the City’s waste into energy.  It is estimated the City can achieve a 93% diversion rate with the implementation of the policies, programs and infrastructure described in the previous option.  However, in the future, the City may continue to utilize transformation of residuals to achieve 95% diversion by 2030.


VII.          Diversion and Green House Gas Emissions Reductions Estimates

Diversion estimates were prepared to identify the waste disposal reduction potential of each policy and program.  Based on the city’s 2012 diversion rate of 77%, it is estimated the city can achieve 92% diversion by 2030 through implementation of all the policies, programs and facilities identified, and a 95% diversion with residual waste processing. 


The commercial sector programs with the greatest diversion potential include mandatory food scraps recycling, expanding the types of recycled materials collected, wet/dry collection, increasing the C&D ordinance diversion requirement, and behavior change marketing. 


For the residential sector, the options with the greatest diversion potential include mandatory food scraps recycling, mandatory diversion rate, behavior change marketing, and wet/dry collection.   In the multi-family sector, the options with the highest diversion potential include implementing an integrated waste management fee structure, behavior change marketing, mandatory food scraps recycling, mandatory diversion rate, wet/dry collection, and converting to bi-weekly refuse collection. Table 1-4 shows the diversion estimates if the options listed in the plan are adopted and implemented.


Table 1-4

Estimated Diversion Increase (tons)

Total Diversion Rate Increase       (%)

Residual Processing Diversion (tons)

Total Diversion Increase with Residual Processing


Diversion Rate Increase with Residual Processing


Short Term (2013-2015)

Short to Medium Term (2013-2020)

Medium Term (2021-2025)

Medium to Long Term (2021-2030)

Long Term (2026-2030)

Total Diversion Increase (2013-2030)

SF Residential











MF Residential












































Diversion (tons)










Diversion (%)










Based on the estimated diversion rates in the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan, the city’s overall Green House Gas (GHG) emissions would be reduced by 17,629 metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE) by 2030.  The GHG emissions reductions are calculated based on the program implementation timeline (i.e. short term, short-to-medium term, medium term, etc.).  The long term programs include residual processing, modeled as combustion (waste-to-energy). The GHG emissions reductions are shown in Table 1-5.


Table 1-5


Short Term

Short to Med Term

Med Term

Med to Long Term

Long Term

Residual Processing


SF Residential








MF Residential








































Note: a negative value (i.e., a value in parentheses) indicates an emission reduction; a positive value indicates an emission increase


VIII.        Financial and Cost Analysis

The first steps in determining the selected zero waste programs’ costs and rate impacts involve developing an understanding of the operational and capital costs for existing programs and establishing a baseline. Table 1-6 shows the costs associated with current operations:


          Table 1-6



The cost analysis is designed to assist the City in making planning-level decisions regarding the selection of appropriate programs for the Zero Waste Plan.  The analysis considers two quantitative factors:

·       Diversion potential (measured by tons per year); and,

·       Cost effectiveness (measured by the cost per diverted ton).

For each selected program, the incremental change in the annual cost for the program and the cost per ton diverted was estimated.  The cost estimates provide a reasonable basis for understanding the potential cost impacts and how costs between programs compare to one another. The estimates presented herein are not intended to calculate the precise results of each program. The tables present a “low” and “high” estimate of the incremental change in the costs associated with the implementation of these programs. The range of costs is reflective of the range experienced in other communities that have implemented these or similar programs.   Table 1-7 presents the incremental annual change in program costs, the estimated tons diverted by program, and the cost/(savings) per diverted ton for each of the selected programs.


Table 1-7


Using the cost analysis data, the percentage impact on existing customer rates for each of the selected program options was calculated. The rate impacts for each selected program are cumulative. The rate impacts are based on fiscal year 2013 budget data and cumulative future tonnage diversion assumptions.  An average change of the “Low” and “High” rate impacts are illustrated in Table 1-8.


Table 1-8

Single Family





rate chg.


rate chg.


rate chg.

Food Collection - carts







Behavior Change







Bulky  Move In-Out



short -med




Weekly Organics/Recycling
& Bi-Weekly Refuse Service

short - med


short -med




Food Collection - carts







Food Collection - bins







Wet/ Dry Collection

med - long


med - long


med - long


Mandatory Recycling







Residual Processing







Total Rate Impact from 2012-2030








Total Rate Impact from 2012-2030








The most cost effective programs are those that result in net cost savings. These programs are illustrated in Table 1-9.

Table 1-9

An Integrated Waste Management System is essential to the infrastructure of trash collections.  As a City that is leading the way in environmental initiatives and programs, reaching the goal of 95% diversion of all waste generated in the city by 2030 could be a reality. Implementation of the recommended strategies will be undertaken over an approximately 20 year period, from 2013 through 2030.  During the implementation, staff will continue to evaluate the efficacy of each strategy, present updates to Council and recommend modifications of the Plan as necessary to meet the zero waste goals and objectives, and to adjust to the changing social, environmental, and economic conditions. 


Next Steps

Based upon comments received from Council, staff will revise the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan and begin outreach to the community for public comment. Upon completion of public comments, staff will return to Council with a revision of the Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan for final review and adoption.


Financial Impacts & Budget Actions

There are no financial impacts associated with the recommendations in this report.  Financial impacts of any and all program options in the Zero Waste Plan would be presented to Council during the five year financial forecasts, rate structure study and bi-annual budget process whenever a new program or program(s) are anticipated to be implemented to achieve our Zero Waste Goal.


Prepared by: Kim Braun, Resource Recovery & Recycling Manager 



Forwarded to Council:







Martin Pastucha

Director of Public Works


Rod Gould

City Manager



1 - Zero Waste Strategic Operations Plan

2 - Appendix A – Waste Characterization Analysis

3 - Appendix B – Population Projections

4 - Appendix C – Recommended Strategies

5 - Appendix D – Zero Waste Program & Diversion Details

6 - Appendix E – WARM Assumptions and Results

7 - Appendix F – Revenue and Expense Data from City

8 - Appendix G – Zero Waste Program Cost Analysis

9 - Appendix H – Report Contributors