Land Use Committee advances ordinance to audit large refuse generators, sends amended bill to budget committee

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors Land Use Committee on Sept. 17 advanced an amended ordinance that would require audits of large refuse generators and set enforcement paths for repeated contamination, sending the proposal to the Budget and Finance Committee for further review.

Sponsor Supervisor Asha Safai described the initiative as part of the city’s broader 0‑waste goal and said the committee made several amendments, including moving the ordinance’s effective date from Jan. 1 to July 1, 2019, and giving the Department of the Environment and Recology three years to complete baseline audits of the roughly 520 accounts in scope. "We're gonna move the effective date from January 1 to 07/01/2019," Safai said during the committee meeting.

Director Rafael of the Department of the Environment framed the ordinance as a response to a persistent problem: the department’s audits show about 60% of material entering the "black" waste stream is recoverable. "This is a solution that has been needed for a long time," he said, summarizing the department’s recommendation to require audits and, where necessary, dedicated 0‑waste facilitators who help facilities sort, communicate with tenants and reduce disposal costs.

Rafael presented a case study the department used to illustrate the model: in one 26‑unit apartment building the facilitator reduced black‑bin volume and produced net savings of about $28,000 a year after accounting for facilitator costs.

Key provisions and clarifications adopted or explained at the hearing include: - Scope: the ordinance targets "large refuse generators" defined as account holders with a roll‑off compactor or those generating 30 cubic yards or more per week (about 520 accounts). - Audit cadence and baseline: the committee agreed to a three‑year baseline period for audits (previously described at 2½ years in earlier drafts). - Facility response and appeals: after a failed audit an account holder has 45 days to submit a plan to the director; if noncompliance persists, the account holder must hire or designate an "exclusive" 0‑waste facilitator for a minimum of 24 consecutive months, though administrative guidance can allow extensions with evidence of good‑faith efforts. - Implementation flexibility: department staff said contamination thresholds will be set in guidance (examples discussed in committee: ~5% contamination tolerance for recycling/composting streams and ~20% for trash) so the director can account for processing and market conditions.

Recology representatives told the committee Recology issues roughly 20,000 tags a year for contamination and that outreach after tagging yields behavior change in about 75% of cases. Minna Tao of Recology said the company and the department have worked iteratively and that with the latest amendments "Recology will be able to meet the mandates to perform the audits."

Public commenters offered a mix of support and concern. Nonprofit housing operators and affordable housing advocates said they need more time and clearer thresholds because many nonprofits manage dozens of properties and operate on tight margins. The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce and the Building Owners and Managers Association urged tailoring requirements by industry and more outreach before penalties apply; hospital representatives cautioned that regulated biomedical streams are not part of this ordinance and asked for careful implementation to avoid interfering with patient‑care waste protocols. Labor representatives (Teamsters and SEIU) urged on‑site hands‑on sorting, saying it improves diversion rates.

The committee voted to accept the discussed amendments and to refer the ordinance, as amended, to the Budget and Finance Committee to allow staff to document fiscal impacts and finalize administrative guidance. Next steps: Budget & Finance will review the ordinance’s fiscal effects before the committee returns the measure to the full Board for a final vote.