Report of Regional Forum to Prepare an Issues Paper for Submittal to CIWMB
Organized by SCCED, May 18, 1999

Executive Summary

A total of 26 participants, including 18 cities and counties, 4 consultants and 4 haulers, met to review and comment on a survey report called "Concerns of Southern California Solid Waste/Recycling Professionals: Issues and Solutions." The discussion encompassed issues to raise to the CIWMB as well as issues to be dealt with on a local and regional level.

CIWMB: Major Solutions Requested

1. CIWMB should increase markets for recyclables — remove tax advantages/subsidies for virgin materials; establish State and Federal tax incentives for recyclables; expand RMDZs; educate farmers to use organic fertilizers/compost; support use of life cycle costing; establish post-consumer content minimums through legislation; state purchase recycled content products.
2. CIWMB should support improved disposal reporting systems — endorse recommendations of the L.A. County Solid Waste Task Force.
3. CIWMB should support increased greenwaste recycling — increase state funding for programs such as compost bins; educate the public about the value of compost; continue credit for ADC.
4. CIWMB should support increased C&D recycling — cities should get diversion credit for refilling a depleted gravel pit; support use of recycled C&D materials in construction.
5. CIWMB should increase business incentives to reduce waste and increase diversion — work with manufacturers associations to reduce over-packaging; establish pre-disposal fees for products; support SB 332 (Sher) "Beverage containers" and SB 1110 (Chesbro) "Rigid plastic packaging."
6. CIWMB should increase program support funding — fund public education in addition to collection to reduce the amount of HHW generated.
7. State should set the example in recycling/diversion — support passage of SB 75.
8. CIWMB should improve enforcement procedures for AB 939 — inform cities and haulers what constitutes a "good faith effort."
9. CIWMB should improve adjustment procedures for AB 939 — send out a list of the acceptable fixes to base year.
10. CIWMB should improve consideration of Southern California issues — hold a special L.A. County fix meeting; hold meetings in Southern California before final decisions made on policy.
11. CIWMB should support increased recycling in multi-family residences — share ideas from innovative programs that are working well.
12. CIWMB could assist recycling facilities siting — support a simpler permit process for small recycling, composting and MRF facilities.
13. CIWMB provide improved information to local jurisdictions — more timely feedback on biannual reports.

Regional/Local: Major Suggestions

1. Cities should increase markets for recyclables — purchase recycled content products; expand RMDZs wherever possible; use life cycle costing for all purchases.
2. Improve disposal reporting systems — implement recommendations of the L.A. County Solid Waste Task Force.
3. Increase greenwaste recycling — expand programs such as compost bins; educate the public about the value of compost.
4. Increase C&D recycling — mandate use of recycled C&D materials in construction.
5. Increase business incentives to reduce waste and increase diversion — support SB 332 and SB 1110; provide more technical assistance to businesses.
6. Increase recycling in multi-family residences — share ideas from innovative programs that are working well.
7. Improve regional cooperation — develop regional partnerships and reporting; develop regional recycling facilities; expand regional/sub-regional coordination meetings.
8. Improve reporting on self-haul.
9. Improve incentives to increase diversion from landfills.

Introduction to the Meeting

Kathleen Gildred, SCCED: This meeting is a follow-up to a meeting on March 2, 1999, in Diamond Bar to increase Southern California input into the CIWMB 21st Century Project. SCCED is a non-profit organization working for a sustainable future for the region in open space, transportation, and waste management issues.

Joe Haworth, L.A. County Sanitation Districts: The opinions expressed at this meeting are personal opinions, not formal positions of the cities and counties, but they are valuable because they are from the people who are actually involved in the implementation of solid waste programs. Our purpose here is to be productive and positive, to work on solutions to challenges we are facing recycling and solid waste management.

Jim Stewart, SCCED: A total of 34 solid waste/recycling professionals responded to the survey, including 29 cities, 3 consultants and 2 haulers. Respondents rated each proposed Issue and Solution as High, Medium, or Low priority.