ITEM 9-C

Santa Monica, California
Council Meeting: July 7, 1992


TO:        Mayor and City Council
FROM:      City Staff
SUBJECT:   Collection Location for Recyclables


INTRODUCTION

This  report  presents   information  regarding  the   collection
location  of recycling containers  in the City  of Santa Monica's
recycling  program.   The  conclusion  reached  by  staff is that
greater  benefits are realized  by both residents  and city crews
when keeping  refuse and  recycling collections  together in  the
same location.

BACKGROUND

In July 1991,  the Solid Waste  Management Division made  several
fundamental changes  in  its  refuse  and  recycling  operations.
These changes included switching from twice weekly, manual refuse
collection  to once  weekly, semi-automated  collection; changing
from a flat fee  billing rate to a  variable fee billing rate  in
order   to  encourage   waste  reduction;   increasing  recycling
collections  from  once  every  two  weeks  to  once  weekly; and
expanding  the   number   of   households   receiving   recycling
collection.

At the  time of  implementation, City  Council directed  staff to
consolidate recycling collections  in  the  same  location  where
refuse   is   collected.    This   change   meant  that  in  some
neighborhoods recycling collections would  remain  at  the  front
curb, while in other neighborhoods with alleys, recyclables would
be collected from  the  alley.   Under  the  previous  collection
system all recyclables were  placed at the front  curb regardless
of   where  refuse  was  collected.   Approximately  60%  of  all
households had their  recycling location moved  from the curb  to
the alley under the new system.

DISCUSSION

The  new collection system has been  in effect for twelve months.
Analysis indicates that there are several benefits to the current
collection location  for  recycled  goods.   First,  there  is  a
considerable  convenience  factor  for  residents  to place their
refuse  and recycling containers in the same area for collection.
Instead of taking some materials  to the front and others  to the
back, all materials can be set-out at the same location.

Second, collection  efficiency on  the part  of the  City is also
realized because  crews do not have  to carry multiple containers
around parked cars  or across busy  streets.  Fewer incidents  of
missed set-outs have been  reported  since  moving  many  of  the
collections to alleys.

Third,    collector   safety   is   enhanced  by  collecting  the
recyclables in alleys.   This  is  of  particular  concern  along
certain streets in the city including Ocean Park Boulevard,  Pico
Boulevard and  Montana  Avenue.   Curbside  pick-up  along  these
heavily traveled streets is  dangerous for collectors as  well as
motorists  who must stop behind the trucks.  Collections in these
areas are considerably safer from the alley than from the street.

A  survey  of  8  cities  was  conducted to assess their policies
regarding collection point  of  recyclables  (Alhambra,  Burbank,
Carson,  Claremont,  Hermosa  Beach,  Pasadena,  Torrance, Rancho
Palos Verdes).  All  cities contacted  said that  recyclables are
collected from the same location as refuse, regardless of whether
that is at the curb or in the alley.

The primary argument against  the alley collection point  is that
theft is more likely to occur in alleys because scavengers cannot
be  seen  as  easily  as  they  can from the street.  While staff
acknowledges that  scavenging  is  a  problem  in  the  recycling
program,  we  do  not  concur  that  the problem is the result of
locating collections in the  alley.   During  the  week  of  June
15-19, 1992, an analysis was conducted to determine if there is a
difference in  the  volume  of  recyclables  collected  from  the
curbside  and  alley  collection  points.   During  this  period,
virtually  no difference was seen in what had been collected from
curbside set-outs and alley set-outs.

It should  be noted  that since  the beginning  of Santa Monica's
recycling  program 12 years ago, scavenging has been a problem to
varying  degrees.   The  rule  of  thumb  is that as the value of
recyclables increases, so too does scavenging.  When scrap values
decline,  scavenging  also   declines.   In  turn,   the  current
depressed  economic situation has likely contributed to increased
scavenging.   During  the  survey  of  local  cities,  most staff
members  asserted that the problem of illegal scavenging in their
city is  difficult to  stop and  that the  location of  materials
plays little role in deterring scavenging.

Despite the fact that scavenging is a problem, collection figures
from July 1991  through April  1992, indicate  that 4600  tons of
recycled materials  were collected  compared to  4200 tons during
the same period in the prior year.  This indicates that a greater
amount of material is being  recycled this year than in  the past
due to increased participation and program expansion.

During  the  past  twelve  months,  staff  has  not  received any
complaints  regarding inconvenience  of the  new system  and  has
received only  six complaints  from residents  concerned about an
increase in illegal scavenging due  to  the  relocation  of  some
recycling collections to the alleys.

To  help  deter  scavenging,  Recycling  staff  will  continue to
respond  to complaints from the public  during the day by sending
the crew supervisor to the particular area where a scavenger  has
been  reported.  If  the scavenger  is found,  a warning  will be
issued to that individual.  Staff will also continue to send  out
warning  letters to scavengers when  complaints received from the
public  provide  enough  information  to  identify the scavenger.
Staff  is also in the process  of installing anti-theft scoops on
the inside of the large recycling bins to prevent scavenging.

The  State  of  California  has  recognized  the  need to prevent
illegal  scavenging from municipal recycling programs in order to
achieve diversion compliance under AB 939.  On January 1, 1992, a
new  law took  effect (AB  1707) which  allows cities  to recover
damages of  up to  $1000 per  violation from  illegal scavenging.
This new state  law may present  the City with  an opportunity to
significantly diminish illegal scavenging.

FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS

There are no financial impacts as a result of this staff  report,
unless changes  in  collection  are  directed  which  make  costs
greater or increase worker safety costs.

RECOMMENDATION:

It  is  recommended  that  no  modifications  to  the   recycling
collection points be made at this time.


Prepared by:  Stan Scholl, Director of General Services
              Tom Dever, Solid Waste Superintendent
              Jon Root, Waste Reduction Coordinator