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

2. 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

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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

6. 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

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

8. 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

9. 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, ~$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

10. 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

11. 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)

12. 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

13. 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.)

14. Cost of Organic Waste Transport and Processing has Increased

15. 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

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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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)

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