By Jubi Headley
November 7, 2011

Cutting costs. Achieving environmental sustainability. Delivering services faster, and better. These were among the themes explored as solid waste and environmental officials from 25 cities and 15 states across the country convened in Houston for the 2011 Municipal Waste Management Association (MWMA) Fall Summit. MWMA is the environmental affiliate of the Conference of mayors.

The Fall Summit, held this year October 24-26 in Houston, brought public sector leaders together with private sector executives from the solid waste industry, to discuss trends, emerging technologies and best practices in zero waste, illegal dumping code enforcement, and other solid waste issues.

The three-day conference featured a diverse array of topics and presentations. “The MWMA Fall Summit was packed solid with useful information, “said Phoenix Assistant Public Works Director John Trujillo. “I got something from every session – I especially enjoyed meeting my peers and sharing best practices with each other. I’d recommend this conference to all solid waste managers.”

Illegal Dumping – Passing costs on to Offenders

“I was particularly interested in the Illegal Dumping session and how others cities are exploring innovative strategies to reduce liability and costs associated with illegal dumping,” says Trujillo. His comments reflect a common concern for solid waste professionals. Typically, it’s difficult for cities to identify the perpetrators of illegal dumping, and as a result costs for cleanup are typically borne by the city, rather than the culprits. Depending on the extent of the problem in a particular city, those costs can run from the tens of thousands into the millions.

Evanston (IL) Public Works Director Suzette Robinson shared her city’s strategies for reducing illegal dumping. In Evanston, the city government initially took ownership of the problem, establishing two programs to attempt to mitigate illegal dumping including “The Special Pick-up Program where residents are provided with one 95-gallon cart free of charge by the city, and special pick-up fees are charged for additional trash that exceeds the capacity of the cart, as well as large/bulky items, move-outs/evictions, etc., as well as The Neighborhood Dumpster Program that provided dumpsters free of charge to civic clubs and neighborhood associations for community cleanup projects.

Costs for the Neighborhood Cleanup Program were supposed to be offset by revenues generated from the Special Pick-Up Program. However, the Neighborhood Cleanup program was plagued with illegal uses, which ultimately diverted from the Special Pick-up Program. By the end of FY 2005 program costs had skyrocketed.

The city responded to the challenge by implementing a range of strategies designed to reduce the costs to the city, and to re-assign ownership of the problem. First, the city ordinance was amended, to enable the city to respond more proactively to illegal dumping in Evanston. The city also undertook an ambitious media campaign to publicize the extent of the problem, and its impact on the city’s bottom line.

Existing programs were revamped – inspections were increased, and special pickup fees were increased as well. And rather than waiting for customers to request pickup, dumps were picked up when first observed – and the resulting fees were immediately charged to property owners.

These revamped programs were complemented by new ones; the Neighborhood Dumpster Program was discontinued and replaced with free residential curbside bulk collections twice annually. In addition, a 311 customer service system was implemented, which facilitated customers’ ability to proactively request bulk collection – and anonymously report illegal dumping violations.

These strategies and programs are producing significant results in Evanston. Anonymous reporting is up; more importantly, illegal dumping has decreased by 50 percent, and revenue for special pickups has increased to more than $100,000 annually. Overall, the city’s refuse has been dramatically reduced, from 18,000 tons to 15,000 tons per year.

Zero Waste – Aspirational or Achievable?

Two Texas cities, San Antonio and Austin, were featured in a special Fall Summit session on zero waste initiatives. Austin Resource Recovery Department Director Bob Gedert noted that his city’s master plan, adopted by the city council in 2009, calls for an aggressive and ambitious program to achieve a 75 percent solid waste diversion rate by the year 2020. In San Antonio, according to Solid Waste Management Director David McCary, his city’s zero waste master plan (adopted by the city council adopted in 2010) also calls for an ambitious 60 percent diversion rate.

Both Austin and San Antonio have launched an array of programs and strategies to increase recycling and reduce landfill waste, including:

• Enhanced collection of bulky brush (in San Antonio, the program diverted three times as much bulky brush from the landfill over the previous year);

• Pilot and/or enhanced organics recycling and composting programs; and

• Implementing a “Pay-As-You-Throw” (PAYT) pricing structure for solid waste collection.

In a PAYT pricing system, customers are charged based on the weight or volume of waste collected. A resident would have the option of selecting one of several sizes of trash carts for their weekly garbage collection – in general, the larger the cart, the higher the fee. PAYT stimulates diversion rates – recycling services are often provided at no additional charge in this system, which encourages more recycling, composting, and overall source reduction. But for both Austin and San Antonio, PAYT is a long-term goal – in San Antonio, for example, the master plan aims to implement PAYT sometime between 2014 and 2020. In the meantime, funding the ambitious programs outlined in their respective zero waste master plans remains a challenge.

Another challenge is that the cities have a limited “sphere of influence,” as Gedert terms it – in Austin the city is only responsible for 25 percent of the city’s total waste stream – primarily single family residential; in San Antonio the number is 20 percent. In both cities waste from multi-family units, commercial enterprises, construction/demolition (C&D) debris, and other sources are handled by private sector trash haulers. As both McCary and Gedert point out, this means that the private sector must be a partner in this effort, if either city hopes to achieve the diversion rates outlined in its master plan.

Both cities face another challenge as well. In Texas, with plentiful open space and low tipping fees (a per ton fee charged for waste deposited at a given facility), there’s a financial disincentive to recycle, compost, etc.

In both Austin and San Antonio, plans are underway to make use of the policy process to achieve their zero waste goals – from mandating recycling at multi-family units and commercial enterprises, to reducing plastic bag use and (in Austin) encouraging more responsible packaging by product manufacturers.

Ultimately, as McCary says, public education is perhaps the most critical component of any zero waste strategy. It will take a sustained and widespread cultural change, so to speak, to achieve zero waste in his – and likely every – city.

One of the most popular sessions, the “Urban Summit,” features no formal presentations of any type. The Urban Summit is a unique experience – more of a brainstorming and strategy session where public sector solid waste, recycling and environmental executives meet in a closed-door forum (no private sector participants or media are allowed), for a candid discussion on the topics most important to them. Participants can talk about whatever they’d like, whether it’s a problem that’s costing their city money, or an issue that they’ve been wrestling to solve. Urban Summit participants put their issues on the table, to the one group of people who completely understand their job and role in the city – and have likely dealt with the same or a similar issue themselves. Participants regularly comment that they leave the Urban Summit with a new idea, solution or program that saves them money.

Other sessions this year’s Fall Summit focused on privatization, Reverse 911 and customer communications strategies; workplace safety; recycling construction and demolition debris; and using technology to improve quality, efficiency, and customer service. Several of these sessions will be featured as best practices in future issues of U.S. Mayor, the Conference of Mayors website, and adapted into webinars.

“The MWMA Fall Summit is one of the most important meetings I attend all year,” said San Diego Environmental Services Director Chris Gonaver. “I get to share and talk out ideas and see how they work in other places, and borrow great ideas from other communities, which helps me do my job better.”

For more information on sessions and presenters at the 2011 MWMA Fall Summit, visit our website at www.usmayors.org/mwma/fallsummit11.asp.