Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council pauses first reading of C&D ordinance after debate over replacing bonds with penalties
Summary
Council heard first-reading presentations on Ordinance 1497—raising construction-and-demolition (C&D) diversion to 65%, introducing online reporting (GreenHalo), and replacing performance bonds with penalties—and continued the item to July 14 for staff to provide comparative penalty data and enforcement options.
Sierra Madre’s council held a lengthy first reading on Ordinance 1497 on June 23, a code amendment to Chapter 8.13 that would align the city’s construction-and-demolition (C&D) requirements with state CalGreen standards and change how the city secures contractor compliance.
Permit technician Christa Elias outlined key changes: increasing the waste-diversion requirement from 50% to 65%, adding an electronic waste-management-plan submittal and tracking platform (GreenHalo), creating inspection holds for noncompliance, and replacing performance bonds with a performance-penalty schedule tied to total project valuation. "Key changes … include increasing the state mandated waste diversion rates from 50% to 65% ... implementing an online system to track waste management plans," Elias explained.
The central flash point in council debate was the proposal to substitute post-hoc monetary penalties for the current practice of requiring upfront performance bonds or securities. Several council members said that while bonds are costly for applicants, they provide upfront security that the city can liquidate if a project fails to meet its diversion requirements. One council member observed that penalties transferred financial risk from the contractor to the city if collection proves difficult and asked how the city would ensure enforcement and collection.
Staff responded that GreenHalo recommended the administrative move and said the proposed penalty levels were modeled on the city’s historical bond schedule. City staff and the vendor noted that the online platform would improve tracking and accuracy of diversion reporting. Council asked staff to return with comparative data showing what other cities charge and alternative options—such as a single flat percentage or retaining bonds for very large projects—before finalizing the change.
Action: The council voted to continue Ordinance 1497 to the July 14 meeting so staff can present market comparisons and enforcement options. No final adoption occurred at the June 23 meeting.
