Re: [greenyes] WM vs THE SMALL RECYCLERS Re: [greenyes] Waste Management an...

[RicAnthony@no.address]

In a message dated 7/24/2003 3:03:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, RJayW2@no.address 
writes:> AB 939--the state's Integrated Waste 
> Management law--mandated that all cities and counties divert 50% of their 
> waste 
> from landfills by year 2000.  This law benefited large operators like Waste 
> Management because they have the means of assuring cities and counties that, 
> in 
> exchange for long-term exclusive franchises--they could "solve the diversion 
> 
> problem" for those cities.  

The problem in California is not the 50% requirement, although it should be a 
zero waste goal. But that 939 provided a legal definition of waste which 
allows franchises to control commodities like metal or cardboard or concrete when 
they are called wasted.  Companies who had long term removal contracts for 
those commodities were in some communities threatened by commercial franchise 
holders.

Cities need to have generator based separation requirements that state the 
specific commodities.  Small contractors need to contract to haul away specific 
items like metal, cardboard and/or concrete.  As soon as you legally call it 
waste it becomes the property of the franchise.

ricanthony@no.address