Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSB 1383 (Oppose)C I T Y O F DIAMOND BAR CALIFORNIA February 28, 2019 Gwen Huff Materials Management and Local Assistance Division California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery P.O. Box 4025 Sacramento, CA 95812 Submission via email to SLCP.Oraanics@calrecycle.ca.gov RE: SB 1383 Proposed Regulation Released January 2019 - COMMENT LETTER Dear Ms. Huff: The City of Diamond Bar appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations released in January 2019, which seek to implement SB 1383 (Lara, 2016). The City of Diamond Bar continues to support both a robust waste management system that complies with California's climate goals as well as reasonable and achievable goals in removing short- lived climate pollutants, including methane, from landfills. We appreciate the stakeholder process CalRecycle is undertaking and the ability to weigh in on the proposed regulations. Municipalities throughout the state are seeking and advocating for solutions to address the need for substantial new infrastructure funding both in our community and across the state. The lack of sufficient available infrastructure capacity to fully meet the goal set forth in SB 1383 is a critical concern that hinders not only the ability to implement the proposed regulations, but requires undetermined resources to meet the variety of annual inspections and enforcement that is necessary to ensure compliance. Additionally, the State has yet to determine the true impacts of SB 1594 upon the composting markets, which the State is relying upon to reach their AB 1826 goals. Therefore, the expansion of the food waste recycling requirements to the residential and multi -family sectors should be delayed 5-10 years. While we commend CalRecycle for acknowledging the critical need for capacity statewide, the implementation of new regulations brings to the forefront the following concerns: Infrastructure Capacity: California lacks sufficient capacity today to be able to meet the needs for new organic waste processing. Many cities have expressed concern over an ability to comply with organic waste diversion requirements due to a lack of waste disposal infrastructure. There is an uneven distribution of waste disposal infrastructure, such as bio - digesters, across the state. Moreover, where the infrastructure does exist, capacity is limited. While the regulation provides five years to implement programs, cities are concerned that this is not sufficient time to develop and permit new facilities. Carol Herrera Steve Tye Andrew Chou Ruth M. Low Nancy A. Lyons Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Council Member Council Member Council Member City of Diamond Bar 121810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar CA 91765-4178 www.DiamondBarCA.gov 1909.839.7000 Fax 909.861.3117 2 February 27, 2019 Funding: Lack of sufficient funds continues to be among the major challenges local governments face in the effort to implement new organic waste diversion programs. The City of Diamond Bar and other communities continue to seek solutions to address the need for substantial public sector funding. Local governments, like ours, continue to work to address the need for funds to undertake prescribed activities, such as funding household hazardous waste programs to prevent contamination of recyclables, and funding for targeted educational programs to help share knowledge about sustainable living. Penalties: The penalties outlined in these regulations are premature. If the purpose of penalties is to ensure generators are sufficiently deterred from non-compliance, this regulation puts the cart before the horse by designing penalties before the sticking points and needs of generators are understood. We encourage CalRecycle to continue working through the programmatic scheme before implementing an appropriate set of penalties, particularly since programs have until 2022 to be implemented. We ask that CalRecycle adopt penalties in a second set of regulations to take effect at a future date. Procurement: New procurement requirements in these proposed regulations require local governments to purchase recovered organic waste products targets set by CalRecycle. We anticipate these requirements will result in substantial additional costs to local governments, over and above the costs we already anticipate to comply with the extensive programmatic requirements of the proposed regulations. We ask that CalRecycle instead work to develop markets for such materials in a second regulatory proceeding. Constitutionality of Fees: CalRecycle should not rely on the fee authority granted to local jurisdictions in SB 1383. Any fee that a city attempted to impose to fund the additional costs of these regulations would likely be treated as a tax under Cal. Const. Art. XIII C, sec. 1(e) (Prop. 26) as it would not meet any of the exceptions identified in that section. Further, even were a fee to survive scrutiny under Prop. 26, it is questionable whether a city would not have the authority to impose the fee without first complying with the majority protest procedures of Cal. Const. Art. XIII D, sec. 6 (Prop. 218.) This latter concern is currently the subject of litigation in the Third District Court of Appeal (Paradise Irrigation District v. Commission on State Mandates, Case No. C081929). The City of Diamond Bar appreciates the inclusive stakeholder process CalRecycle has undertaken and look forward to continued opportunities to comment on specific proposals. Sincerely, - ; <" Daniel- Fox` City Manager cc. City Council Jennifer Quan, League of California Cities Ryan McLean, Assistant City Manager David Liu, Public Works Director/City Engineer Anthony Santos, Assistant to the City Manager