By Rebecca Jewell, RU Co-Organizer and Portia Sinnott, Editor
68 surveys were received out of 430 registrations – 16%; 10% is considered a good response. Approximately 120 comments were submitted including 29+ recommendations for next year. Only a few respondents skipped questions, except for Q11. NCRA Events Outside of Zero Waste Week, received 21 responses and 47 skips.
Q1. Overall: 91% of the respondents said the Conference was Excellent – 54% or Good – 37%. Nine percent said okay and no one – 0% said they did not enjoy the Conference.
Q2. Topics: 90% were satisfied or very satisfied with the Speaker topics.
Q3. Recommendations: Almost half – 46%, made speaker recommendations or other suggestions for next year.
Q4. Subjects: The top ten subjects they would like to see more of in 2020 were EPR, Food Waste Reduction, Public Education Strategies, Food Recovery, Legislation and Regulations, Reuse/Repair, Product Bans, Product Redesign, Franchise Innovations and Zero Waste Businesses.
Q5. Price: 80% said the price was just right for the content; 9% would pay more, 7% a little expensive, 4.69% too expensive.
Q6. ZWW Events: When asked which of the other Zero Waste Week events they found valuable, more than half – 55%, said they were not able to attend the other events, 31%, said Green Drinks, 14% Zero Waste Youth Convergence and 13% Devil We Know film screening and discussion.
Q7. Zero Waste Week: 76% of folks said they think we should continue to offer Zero Waste Week, 1.5% said No and 22% No Opinion.
Q8. NCRA News: 88% read the NCRA News; 47% said they read it monthly while 41% said they read it occasionally. (One suggestion was to include it on the NCRA Facebook page.)
Q9. Membership: 79% of the respondents are NCRA members.
Q10. Member Satisfaction: 73% are satisfied with the services and information NCRA offers to its membership; specifically, 31% are very satisfied, 42% satisfied and 5% are neutral; 19% are non-members. There were zero comments.
Q11. NCRA Events Outside of ZWW: Only 21 respondents answered this question. 57% attend Tours, 52% Networking Mixers, 33% Annual Meetings, 29% the Annual Picnic, 24% Board Meetings and 10% the Semi-annual Holiday Party.
Q12: Lunch: 75% thought highly of the lunch: Excellent – 53% or Good – 22%. Nine suggestions were provided including a better system rewarding folks who brought their own plate and telling folks in advance what’s on the menu so they can choose to bring their lunch.
Q13: Profession or Affiliation: 53% of attendees are government employees, 13% consultants, 7% educators; 10% franchised waste haulers/recycler; 7% are non-profits, 7% are educators, 6% businesses, 6% activists, 7% other and 0% Independent recycler/composter.
Comments List In Question And Submittal Order
Editor’s Note: One comment was edited to remove identifiable references. The two specific individuals were apprised of these comments via email and phone.
Q1. Overall
Q2: Topics
Q3: Recommendations
Q4: Subjects
Q5 Price:
Q6 ZWW Events
Q7. Zero Waste Week
Q8. NCRA News
Q9. Membership
Q10. Member Satisfaction – 0 comments
Q11. NCRA Events Outside of ZWW
Q12: Lunch
Q13: Profession or Affiliation
# # #
Board of Directors Meeting: 6/20/19, 6:30 pm
Location: John Moore’s office, 1999 Harrison Street, 18th Floor Oakland, CA
Check-in with security in the lobby.
Call 925 913-0143 if you need assistance calling in or getting into the building
Thanks!
Board Meeting Agenda, 6/20/19
6:30 pm Meeting called to order
6:30 pm Actions Requiring Discussion/Policy Decisions
8:00 pm Treasurer’s Report
8:15 pm Actions Requiring Expenditures
8:20 pm Report by Committee: (15-20 mins each)
9:00 pm Adjournment
REQUEST TO THE NCRA BOARD AND MEMBERSHIP TO SUPPORT THE BOONE/STEIN O-MRF/MxWP LAWSUIT AND PROVIDE AN AMICUS BRIEF
By Arthur R. Boone, Center for Recycling Research (CRR) and former NCRA President and long-term Board Member, 6/13/19, arboone3@gmail.com. Antoinette Stein, Ph.D. also contributed to this article.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: For over 20 years, Waste Management of Alameda County has been planning to begin composting at their Davis Street Transfer Station (DSTS) near the bay in San Leandro. In the late 1990s an outdoor project was planned but due to worries about odors and equipment noise it was scrapped. In 2010 a second plan surfaced with indoor materials reception, prep and anaerobic composting envisioned. The City of San Leandro (CSL) approved that plan in 2011 and construction was completed on the building but not the inner workings. For some time, starting in late 2011, WMAC staff explored the idea of a mixed waste processing (MxWP) facility replacing the organics material prep space in the northeast building, which firmed up into a plan submitted in December 2016 to the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (ACWMA) with project review hearings in February and March, 2017.
Antoinette Stein, Ph.D., then a member of the Alameda County Recycling Board – a sibling agency to the ACWMA, and Arthur , former NCRA president, spoke at all three hearings of the project’s deficiencies as they saw them. In late March the ACWMA approved the project and Stein/Boone sought court review. At the Superior Court hearings, the judge agreed that substantial change was made to the project namely that it had tripled in amount of material being processed. She gave two tentative rulings in their favor only to reverse herself after hearing from attorneys on both sides of the issue. Since the middle of 2018, the matter has been before the court of appeals for this area and each of the parties have filed opening briefs and are in their final days of telling the court why they are right.
Stein/Boone are currently seeking persons and organizations (including NCRA) to endorse their side of the conflict and to file a document with the court known as an amicus brief which would state why NCRA supports the Stein/Boone position. NCRA president David Krueger has agendized the matter for the June 20, 2019 board meeting and all NCRA members are being given this briefing via the NCRA News for full enlightenment. Both the City of Oakland and the ACWMA are aware of this document and Stein/Boone think it only fair for NCRA members and boardmembers to hear and understand both sides of the issues being contended.
At the NCRA board meeting next Thursday, the board will be asked to approve of our lawsuit and to file an amicus brief with the Court of Appeals to explain how the WMAC/City of Oakland proposal to build a mixed waste processing plant (MxWP) in San Leandro, now known as an O-MRF, with an indoor composting facility and a separate anaerobic digestion (AD) facility and the ACWMA’s decision to approve the project were in error. Because of the way the matter is framed, the ACWMA is known as the respondent and the garbage company is spoken of as “a real party in interest.”
Ten Issues
WMAC’s lead staffer said that the large biofilter installed outside the processing buildings would capture all gasses created in the buildings and would solve any and all of these problems. What he did not suggest was careful monitoring of the perimeter of the facility before and after operations began to check for methane levels in the ambient air. Methane is an odorless gas and whether it escaped into the atmosphere or was broken down in the biofilter would only be known by careful perimeter monitoring, odors were a big concern to WMAC but not all gasses have odors.
In conclusion, as moving parties in this process, we are not asking the appeals court to end the project, we are simply asking the court to find defects in the procedures that can be addressed by a more careful examination of the facts as they exist. We hope that NCRA will join us in asking this review and reconsideration and include such items as it chooses in its brief.
PS. I was given a copy of NCRA President David Krueger’s response to our Support Request. In the same way that he disagrees with my statements and conclusions, I disagree with his. Over the weekend I will respond with clarity and brevity, and as planned add footnotes and references to this Request. NCRA members interested in reading my reply and the longer version are welcome to request it at arboone3@gmail.com. All boardmembers will get a copy long before the Thursday meeting. I appreciate the tone of this discussion and I hope we can all keep to the matters at hand and reach good decisions; so far so good. ARB
REQUEST TO NOT SUPPORT THE BOONE/STEIN O-MRF/MxWP LAWSUIT
By David Krueger, NCRA President, 6/14/19
The views expressed in this article are solely Mr. Krueger’s and do not represent a formal NCRA position. Mr. Krueger has over 25 years of experience in the recycling industry.
Waste Management of Alameda County (WMAC) is currently constructing a mixed waste processing facility and an indoor aerobic composting facility at the Davis St. Transfer Station in San Leandro. WMAC’s franchise agreement with the City of Oakland requires them to process all mixed waste collected from multi-family dwellings in the City. Oakland also requires all multi-family dwellings to provide source separated recycling and organics services to their tenants. Multi-family dwellings in Oakland are not allowed to “opt out” of having green cart organics service. Oakland participates in Alameda County’s Mandatory Recycling Ordinance.
The new mixed waste processing facility (Organic Materials Recovery Facility, or “O-MRF”) is designed to recover compostable and recyclable materials from Oakland’s garbage that were not recovered through source separation. Oakland residents and businesses will still source separate their discards into three streams (recycle, compost, garbage) and the contents of the garbage containers will be sorted at the O-MRF to recover any organics and recyclables that were improperly placed in the garbage by the generators.
The indoor aerobic composting facility is designed to compost source separated organics from commercial businesses and multi-family dwellings in Oakland and other WMAC cities, as well as organic materials recovered from Oakland’s garbage at the O-MRF. Organics from Oakland’s single-family homes (which consist primarily of yard trimmings) will continue to be transferred through Davis St. to WMAC’s outdoor aerated static pile composting facility at the Altamont Landfill outside of Livermore.
In another article, Arthur Boone encourages NCRA members and the NCRA Board to support he and Toni Stein’s lawsuit against the Alameda County Waste Management Authority (Stopwaste) and WMAC which attempts to require a new EIR for the O-MRF project and, presumably to ultimately stop the construction of the O-MRF and adjacent indoor aerobic composting facility. I respectfully disagree. Mr. Boone lists ten concerns about the facility. I will attempt to address some of his concerns and to explain why I do not support the lawsuit.
I believe that NCRA should support the development of more recycling and composting facilities in Northern California and be skeptical of the NIMBY movements that oppose them. I believe that NCRA should support good faith efforts to achieve Zero Waste, and should encourage experimentation and innovation by different cities and business who are working towards our shared goal. There is more than one road to Zero Waste.
# # #