Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee forwards contested Recology landfill disposal agreement after months of debate
Summary
After months of hearings and a lengthy public‑comment period that split Yuba County officials and San Francisco community and labor supporters, the Budget & Finance subcommittee amended and moved the Recology 10‑year landfill disposal and facilitation agreement to the full Board with recommendation.
The Budget & Finance subcommittee on Tuesday voted to send a 10‑year landfill disposal and facilitation agreement with Recology to the full Board of Supervisors after extended public testimony and analytic review.
Department of the Environment Director Melanie Nutter said Recology's Ostrom Road landfill in Yuba County was the lowest‑cost bidder by about 24% and that the proposal could save ratepayers up to $100 million over the term, including $2 million in reduced government disposal costs. The plan calls for rail transport to reduce truck miles and greenhouse‑gas emissions and includes an amended facilitation agreement to evaluate port/barging and other alternatives within five years.
Budget analyst Harvey Rose summarized independent reviews (LAFCO/R3) and raised procurement and franchise‑fee concerns: San Francisco currently receives about 14.2% of the value of fee revenues and free services from its current provider, lower than peer cities; R3 recommended considering competitive procurement and exploring whether the 1932 refuse ordinance should be repealed and placed on the ballot.
Speakers were sharply divided. Yuba County officials and downstream farmers warned that host fees could increase, rail spur permitting and environmental review are unresolved, and the Ostrom Road facility faces groundwater and runoff concerns. Yuba supervisors urged the city to delay to avoid ‘‘blank check’’ exposure to host‑fee increases.
Local Bayview Hunters Point advocates, labor leaders and neighborhood merchants argued Recology has been a long‑term local partner, creating union jobs and community programs. The San Francisco Labor Council, NAACP, religious leaders, and the Chamber of Commerce urged approval, citing local hiring and Recology's employee‑owned model.
After public comment the committee initially moved the item to the full Board without recommendation, then rescinded that procedural motion and — after adding facilitation language to explicitly explore Port‑of‑San Francisco alternatives — moved the agreement to the full Board with recommendation.
The facilitation amendment requires exploring transportation alternatives and the feasibility of developing refuse handling facilities at the Port, with an evaluation no later than the fifth anniversary of the agreement's effective date. The item now advances to the full Board for final action and any additional conditions.
