Sonoma County Waste Management Agency Alternatives and Next Steps PRESENTATION TO: Sonoma County Waste Management Agency July 20, 2016

Key Issues Implications of Dissolution New JPA Agreement SCWMA Services Competitive Procurement for Organic Waste (e.g., green, wood, food, etc.) Processing Out-hauling Member Agencies would assume individual compliance with AB 939. CalRecycle recognizes SCWMA as the AB939 reporting agency

Implications of Dissolution HHW Program (County-wide) Need to contract with HHW service provider Estimated additional annual cost of $1.3M Planning and Reporting (County-wide) Must comply with AB939 reporting requirements Estimated additional annual cost of $21,900 - $121,900 Estimated one-time costs of $60,000 - $180,000 Education and Outreach (County-wide) Additional costs on a case-by-case basis for each Member Agency HHW costs $1,290,793 Planning and reporting costs Yearly: $21,900 - $121,900; One-time: $60,000 - $180,000 These costs are County-wide costs, on top of any amounts already expended via SCWMA. E.g. the additional amounts that would likely be paid if the Agency were to dissolve.

Implications of Dissolution Organic Waste Processing Member Agencies would need to arrange alternative contracts for: Transfer of organic waste at transfer facility(ies) Transport of organic waste to processing facility(ies) Processing of delivered organic waste at processing facility(ies) What will happen in February if JPA Agreement isn’t extended or renewed, because JPA will no longer exist Planning and reporting with CalRecycle, including potentially a new baseline year study, SRRE, HHWE, NDFE, Mandatory Commercial Recycling, Mandatory Commercial Organics Recycling, prepare for 2016 EAR.

New JPA Agreement: Proposed Terms SCWMA Board membership SCWMA voting requirements Programmatic focus areas/changes Flexibility around development of future organic waste program Agency Counsel’s “Outline of Terms” Program focus: HHW Planning & Reporting Outreach & Education Compost

Comparison With 8 JPAs in Northern California Board Makeup 6 have only elected officials on Board 2 require unanimous vote Services 6 offer HHW services 5 perform planning and reporting services 3 offer grants 5 are involved in franchise agreements Facilities 2 own transfer stations 1 owns a MRF 1 owns a Landfill About half of those surveyed performed planning and reporting

Summary of SCWMA Services Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Planning and Reporting Outreach and Education Organic Waste Program

HHW Alternatives Current haulers generally not interested Contract with existing regional program not available (i.e., Novato SD or Marin County) Partner with other Member Agencies on a case-by-case basis Direct contract with HHW service provider Likely higher cost ($120/user vs. $70 current) Potentially lower level of services

Planning and Reporting Alternatives Annual costs for AB 939 Reporting Estimated additional County-wide cost of ~$22,000 to ~$122,000 if not provided via centralized agency Immediate costs if regional reporting abandoned Estimated additional County-wide cost ~$60,000 - ~$180,000 Baseline year study and planning documents Member Agencies could provide With internal staff resources Contract out Partner with other Member Agencies on a case-by- case basis

Public Education and Outreach Alternatives Must maintain current level of services to comply with AB 939 Haulers can provide, but may require amendment to franchise agreements and may result in higher costs Member Agencies could provide With internal staff resources, Contract out Partner with other Member Agencies on a case-by- case basis

Organic Waste Processing Program Alternatives Organic waste currently delivered to transfer stations and out-hauled to four compost facilities Contracts last until current JPA term expires Facility capacity and cost issues Costs are recovered from rate-payers based on tonnage delivered via current transfer system Specific form of future program still to be determined (discussed later in this presentation)

Direction to Staff: New JPA Agreement Provide direction to staff regarding the proposed terms for a New JPA Agreement, including future SCWMA services for Member Agencies: HHW Planning & Reporting Education & Outreach Organic Waste Program

Organic Waste Alternatives: Competitive Procurement Current Board direction to gather information Concurrent with the development of New JPA Agreement Acquire new and additional information on costs, facility capacity, materials, etc. Clarify the relationships contracts/ agreements (e.g., transfer, transport, waste commitments, etc.)

Cost of Organic Waste Transport and Processing has Increased

Additional Fees Added to Organic Waste Transfer and Processing Garbage Tip Fee Under flow commitments to the Central Landfill Fees are applied to material passing through County facilities A step back to look at overall fees applied to garbage since October 2015

Per-Ton Cost of Organic Waste Transport and Processing $34.10 / ton in 2014 These figures don’t include County or SCWMA fees

Options for Organic Waste Program 1) If SCWMA does not provide for organic waste processing, Member Agencies can: Direct-haul organic waste to facilities Will require collection route changes, additional collection trucks Possible increase in GHG emissions Higher collection costs (appx. +$225K/route) Use County transfer stations Member Agencies may need to arrange separate contracts If they use County transfer stations, Member agencies must arrange contracts with Compost facilities, Transfer stations, and arrange for transportation

Options for Organic Waste Program 2) If SCWMA secures contract for in-county processing: SCWMA-owned facility Higher liability for SCWMA/Member Agencies Less control over costs/protection from risk Will require Member Agency flow control Contractor-owned facility Lower liability for SCWMA/Member Agencies May require 2 – 3 years

Options for Organic Waste Program 3) If SCWMA arranges for out-hauling and processing: Longer-term agreements might help control costs (will require longer JPA Agreement) No changes in routing Will require Member Agency flow control Conduct procurement for processing facility Conduct procurement for out-haul

Organic Waste Program: Discussion & Next Steps Discuss current organic waste program and potential alternatives Provide direction to staff regarding next steps: Clarify and affirm contractual relationships Conduct competitive procurement for organic waste processing facility capacity Conduct competitive procurement for out-haul services (if possible)

Questions and Further Discussion THANK YOU Richard Tagore-Erwin & Garth Schultz R3 Principals www.r3cgi.com