ZWAC Minutes, June 2017

May 10, 2017. 1970 Broadway, 9th floor, Oakland.

Attendees were D. Brooms, J. Moore, D. Krueger, L. McKaughan, A. Boone, M. VanDeventer, and D. Knapp, with call-in guest Heidi Sanborn. D. Brooms, Scribe

At 6:12 pm, meeting was called to order.

  1. Review, Additions, and Approval of Agenda.
  2. Lawsuit against WMAC related to Measure D.
    Boone provided an overview of the lawsuit that he and Toni Stein had filed against Waste Management of Alameda County (WMAC) and several public agencies, citing irregularities in the adoption of a CEQA-approved site development plan for the Davis Street Transfer Station.Boone gave the presentation for ZWAC to understand the court case, particularly as it relates to Measure D, 1990, which established some peculiar local laws regarding waste reduction and recycling. NCRA and ZWC were the main supporters of Measure D, 1990 and this is in some ways a follow-on of that legislation.Boone is making rounds to gain support. The ZW committee of the SF Bay chapter of the Sierra Club has endorsed the lawsuit. The Measure D intent is to not invest public funds for mixed sorting. WMAC has a vested interest in the project, to get the good stuff out of the mixed. Suspect that Houston is pushing this as a model for the USA.This project is contrary to and a deterrent to source separation as practiced and encouraged in Alameda County, to manage discarded materials in the most cost-efficient manner, by not mixing them together in a fashion that deters their highest and best use. Efforts should continue more toward manditory recycling. Also, Stein is concerned about the Bay Area air quality, particularly West Oakland, San Leandro Northeast and Norhwest nearest I-880, and the San Francisco Marina, with ships coming to port.
  3. McKaughan commented on a Multi-family outreach survey of 15 buildings, which found that 74% was good stuff is still found in garbage.
  4. Calif Product Stewardship Council’s Position on SB 168
    Sanborn commented that nobody had prior knowledge of SB 168. We don’t want the carpet stewardship to be a model for the Bottle Bill. Susan Collins of CRI is very concerned. People to benefit are not the California public. Structure in not optimal. There is no source reduction, control of our funds, no performance standards. It must be 501c3, not 50c6. Money is to be for oversight, transparancy and accountability. They would be able to use our money to sue us.Knapp believes that Joy Ann Roy, legislative consultant, is a primary author of SB 168. Sanborn and Collins figure the best strategy is to try to see what can be done to fix infrastructure. The fix should be $50 million to save the $1 billion program. Sanborn intends to call people later to slow it down, get it right. Feelings are that nothing is worth salvaging in SB 168. It’s a distraction from CalRecycle’s inaction on the Bottle Bill.Heidi Sanborn, Exec Director joined via phone to express the views of CPSC on SB 168, the Beverage Container Recycling Act of 2017. This Bill by Senator Bob Wieckowski would create a Beverage Container Stewardship Organization (BCSO) to replace the current Bottle Bill program. The BCSO would be comprised of beverage distributors, and would be modeled after the CA mattress recycling Stewardship program.
  5. Status of Bills Supported/Opposed by NCRA
    Brooms provided a status of the Bills for which NCRA has written letters of Support:

Meeting was adjourned at 7:58 pm.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *