Special Notice / Hearing: None__
Vote Required: Majority
To: Honorable Board of Supervisors
From: Michael P. Callagy, County Executive
Subject: Response to 2023-24 Civil Grand Jury Report “The State of Compost Compliance in San Mateo County”
RECOMMENDATION:
title
Approve the County’s response to the 2023-24 Civil Grand Jury Report “The State of Compost Compliance in San Mateo County.”
body
BACKGROUND:
On July 11, 2024, the 2023-24 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury issued a report titled “The State of Compost Compliance in San Mateo County” (Report), requesting that the County respond to six Findings (Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7) and three Recommendations (Nos. 1, 4, 8) set forth in the Report.
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933, the County’s response to the Report is due to the Honorable Amarra A. Lee, Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, no later than October 9, 2024, which is 90 days after issuance of the Report.
DISCUSSION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors submit the following responses to the Report in compliance with Penal Code Section 933.05:
FINDINGS
Finding No. 1:
High green cart enrollment costs and insufficient bin space are the dominant contributors to low participation rates among multi-family dwellings and businesses.
Response: The County partially disagrees with this Finding as it pertains to the County’s jurisdiction. The County agrees that the additional cost of a green cart for multi-family dwellings and businesses, and insufficient space in these buildings to site these carts, are barriers to participation in the composting program for the unincorporated areas of the county. However, the degree to which these are the dominant factors is unknown.
Finding No. 2:
Green bin contamination among compliant multi-family dwellings and businesses prevents them from diverting more organic waste.
Response: The County partially disagrees with this Finding as it pertains to the County’s jurisdiction. If renters and businesses perfectly segregated their waste, recycling, and organics, a higher percentage of the waste stream would be organic material. However, the exact percentage of organic waste that becomes trash due to contamination is unknown.
Finding No. 3:
City, County, and RethinkWaste compliance outreach efforts for multi-family dwellings and businesses could improve because a significant portion of these properties remain non-compliant.
Response: The County agrees with this Finding as it pertains to the County.
Finding No. 4:
Multi-family dwellings and businesses produce a significant amount of the County’s organic waste.
Response: The County agrees with this Finding.
Finding No. 5:
Citizens cannot conveniently access reliable diversion and participation rates because JPAs and cities do not make the information available on their government websites.
Response: The County partially disagrees with this Finding as it pertains to the County’s jurisdiction. The County agrees that participation rates (i.e., the number of residents/businesses that utilize a recycling and/or composting service) are not currently easily accessible. However, the County disagrees that diversion rates (i.e., how much is being recycled or composted) are not available, as diversion rates for RethinkWaste member agencies (including the County) can be found in the annual reports on the RethinkWaste website <https://rethinkwaste.org/about/rethinkwaste/annual-reports-budgets/>. Additionally, since 2007, CalRecycle has shifted their target metric for jurisdictions from a diversion rate measurement system to a daily per capita disposal rate system in order to better account for source reduction activities. This metric for all cities and counties can be readily found on ’CalRecycles Local Government Reporting webpage <https://calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/>.
Finding No. 7:
An alternate and reliable method to separating waste tons by property type would be analyzing contamination statistics from route audits and waste evaluations.
Response: The County disagrees with this Finding, as it is unclear how waste tons segregated by property type can be obtained through contamination statistics from route audits and waste evaluations.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation No. 1:
Beginning March 1, 2025, cities, the County, and RethinkWaste should host regular in-person green cart enrollment summits for non-compliant businesses and multi-family dwellings, and identify other new compliance strategies.
Response: This Recommendation requires further analysis. The County disagrees that regular, in-person green cart enrollment summits will be successful in increasing participation and diversion rates. Given that non-compliant businesses and multi-family dwellings have been unresponsive to previous outreach efforts, it seems unlikely that voluntary in-person meetings will garner much more participation. However, the County will work with RethinkWaste and Recology over the next year to identify other ways to engage effectively with those who are not in compliance.
Recommendation No. 4:
Beginning November 30, 2024, cities should publish quarterly or annual waste reports with diversion and participation rates on their government websites.
Response: This Recommendation has yet to be implemented but will be implemented in the future. As explained above in response to Finding No. 5, diversion rates (i.e., how much is being recycled or composted) for member agencies (including the County) are already published on ’RethinkWastes website <https://rethinkwaste.org/about/rethinkwaste/annual-reports-budgets/> through its annual reports; however, the County will request that RethinkWaste additionally publish participation rates (i.e., the number of residents/businesses that have recycling and/or composting service) specific to County franchised areas and include a link to such rates on the County’s website. Additionally, as also explained above in response to Finding No. 5, CalRecycle shifted their target metric for jurisdictions from a diversion rate measurement system to a daily per capita disposal rate system in order to better account for source reduction activities. This metric for all cities and counties can be readily found on ’CalRecycles Local Government Reporting webpage <https://calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/>, a link to which the County will also include on its website.
Recommendation No. 8:
By February 1, 2025, jurisdictions should develop and implement new ways to make green bins usable in multi-family dwellings’ and businesses’ narrow or small waste enclosures.
Response: This Recommendation requires further analysis. Narrow or small waste enclosures in multi-family dwellings and businesses have been ongoing challenges for composting and recycling programs. The County will collaborate with RethinkWaste, Recology, and others over the next year to discuss new potential ways to make green bins more accessible in buildings that have space constraints.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with the acceptance of the County’s response to the report.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: The State of Compost Compliance in San Mateo County