San Francisco committee clears $537,000 to prototype new city trash cans amid debate over $20,000 unit estimate

The Budget and Finance Committee voted July 21 to forward to the full Board a $537,000 release of reserved funds so Public Works can finish design refinement and prototype testing of new street trash cans intended to replace about 3,300 units across San Francisco.

Public Works told the committee the funds would pay for design finalization, fabrication of 15 prototypes (five of each of three designs) and field testing. Project manager Lisa Zuo said the prototypes are intended to address chronic problems with the city’s current cans — vandalism and easy rummaging, overflow, lack of compatible rollable liners and maintenance challenges — and to test new features including anti‑rummage chutes and electronic fill sensors that would alert Recology when a can needs emptying.

“Currently we’re securing the funding to proceed with the prototyping phase,” Zuo said, summarizing a timeline that includes a multi‑week design refinement, a six‑to‑eight‑week prototyping period, 60 days of on‑street field testing, and a later competitive solicitation for mass procurement using the final design package.

Chair Matt Haney and several supervisors pressed staff on costs and approach after Zuo said the prototype unit costs are estimates based on proof‑of‑concept work. Zuo said the per‑prototype figure is now being budgeted at roughly $20,000 per can — a high‑end estimate that accounts for one‑off fabrication without mass‑production molds. She said off‑the‑shelf alternatives range from about $3,000 to $5,000 per unit, and the goal for the final design is to reach a cost comparable to off‑the‑shelf options once mass production is attainable.

“I $20,000 a can is … ridiculous,” Haney said. “It’s a Fox News headline waiting to happen. We really need to understand why it is so expensive.”

Public Works staff acknowledged the sticker shock, describing the high per‑unit prototype cost as a function of small‑run stainless‑steel fabrication and custom components. The department said it will procure some off‑the‑shelf cans for comparison during the pilot and place prototypes in multiple neighborhoods — moving units during the 60‑day pilot to collect data across different street types and usage patterns.

Jeremy Spitz, Public Works, confirmed earlier small pilots of “big‑belly” style look‑alikes in civic plazas had produced maintenance problems, including broken handles and jammed flaps. Simon Bertrang, executive director of the Tenderloin Community Benefits District, called from the public line to urge release of the funds and asked that pilots include the Tenderloin, which his district says is already testing many “big‑belly” units.

Public Works said the project’s long‑term purchase would come from refuse‑rate funds (not the general fund) and would be phased over multiple years rather than replacing all 3,300 cans at once. Staff said the city will own the design and intends to run a competitive procurement for mass production based on the pilot’s final specifications.

The committee recorded a roll‑call vote sending the reserve release to the full Board with a positive recommendation. The motion passed by recorded ayes from the three committee members present.

Next steps: Public Works will use the released funds to finalize designs, fabricate prototypes, run the 60‑day field tests and return with a final design package to solicit mass‑production bids.