GreenYes Archives

[GreenYes Archives] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

[GreenYes] Zero Waste Proposal sent to CIWMB by GRC

CRRA Members:

The following is an email that was sent yesterday to the CIWMB regarding funding for Zero Waste Initiatives and the Governor's Strategic Growth Plan. GRC welcomes your review and comments on this proposal. If you would like to be involved in a public review process set up by the CIWMB, please let us know and we'll put you on a list for notification about that. Thanks!

Gary Liss
GRC Secretary

Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:44:35 -0500
From: lanthony13@no.address

Chair Rosario Marin:

The Global Recycling Council (GRC) of CRRA calls upon the CA Integrated Waste Management Board to convene a public review (by a Task Force, Committee review or other public process) of the attached proposal to establish a Zero Waste Fee to fund Zero Waste initiatives and support the use of reused, recycled and composted materials in bond issues proposed by the Governor.

This was inspired by the challenge to achieve Zero Waste by 2025 issued by Cabinet Secretary Terry Tamminen at last year's CRRA Conference. GRC would like to see a broad consensus develop on a proposal like this that includes participation of a broad cross-section of stakeholders in the process.

Given the nature of the timing on the proposed bond issues, GRC would appreciate an expedited process for review of this proposal as quickly as possible. GRC would also like to work with you to identify a legislative sponsor (one or more legislators and/or one or more organizations) for a proposal like this.

Thank you for your consideration and assistance.


Laura Anthony
Global Recycling Council
4433 Temecula St #7
San Diego, CA 92107

Global Recycling Council
Zero Waste Funding Proposal
(GRC adopted January 19, 2006)

Cabinet Secretary Terry Tamminen challenged the California Resource Recovery Association (CRRA) to pursue its goal of Zero Waste by the 2005 CRRA Annual Conference in Los Angeles. The following proposal is designed to build on that challenge and respond to the innovative proposals from Governor Schwarzenegger for a wide variety of state bond issues in his Strategic Growth Plan.

In many European nations, they have adopted significant fees on landfills of $20-40/ton to fund recycling programs and decrease greenhouse gases. In San Jose, the combined fees and taxes on landfilling are over $19/ton, and they have one of the highest waste diversion rates in the state.
GRC propose that the state adopt a Zero Waste Fee on landfills that would be structured as follows:
* The Fee would be levied on all wastes disposed of in the state or transported for disposal out of the state, to ensure that wastes are not transferred out of state to avoid this fee.
* The Fee would credit all local fees charged already. This would level the playing field, and not encourage wastes to be transferred from one county to another. For example, in San Jose if the state enacted a $30/ton fee, San Jose landfills would be levied at $30/ton (ZW Fee) - $19/ton (local fees), or $11/ton.
* Half of the revenue from the Zero Waste landfill fee would be used to cover the local government match for state bond issues, structured as follows:
* The amount of funds to be used would be proportional to the percentage of materials used in construction projects under the bond issue made of reused, recycled or composted materials.
* These funds will decrease over time as the amount of wastes decreases to landfills. As a result, these funds should be viewed as only part of the repayment plan for the local match on bond issues. For example, it could provide the first five years of matches, while state or local governments adopt other funding sources to replace these funds. Then these funds would be phased out over the following five years, as wastes dramatically decrease.
* Half of the revenues from the fee would go to adopt and implement local Zero Waste plans, policies, and programs, including:
* Zero Waste plans for communities and businesses
* Development, consideration and adoption of local Zero Waste policies, including policies to Reduce wastes, Redesign processes and programs to eliminate wastes, product and packaging takeback programs, and procurement of products that are environmentally preferable and sustainable.
* Technical assistance and training programs, including:
i. Development of procurement documents to solicit Zero Waste services, including collection, processing and marketing services for discarded materials (only if incentives are included that make it more cost effective to eliminate and reduce waste than to continue wasting)
ii. Certification and training programs for skills and knowledge required to plan and implement Zero Waste programs
iii. Peer matching and consulting assistance, managed by a nonprofit recycling or Zero Waste organization (like CRRA)
iv. A Recycling Information Network using state colleges and universities to compile and analyze data locally while training students to enter this field and develop curricula and classes for training on Zero Waste.
* Planning, engineering, permitting, siting, land acquisition, equipment and construction for the capitalization of Zero Waste programs (not operating costs, as these funds will be decreasing over time), including:
i. Reuse facilities
ii. Recycling facilities
iii. Composting facilities
iv. Resource Recovery Parks
v. Anaerobic digestion (but NOT landfills, "conversion technologies" or "transformation" facilities)
vi. Market development activities for reuse, recycling and composting

These funds should build on existing private, nonprofit and public programs first, and not duplicate existing investments. The state should work with the food industry, landscapers, and builders in planning programs and projects to absorb organics and materials from construction and demolition projects.

The amount of the proposed Zero Waste Fee would need to be determined based on input from a broad cross-section of stakeholders.

Cc: Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez
Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata
CIWMB Boardmembers
CRRA Boardmembers
Global Recycling Council Executive Committee
Mark Murray, Californians Against Waste
Heidi Melander, Northern CA Recycling Assn.
Linda Christopher, GrassRoots Recycling Network
Karen Smith,

The Global Recycling Council (GRC) is a Technical Council of the California Resource Recovery Association (CRRA). The views expressed in this proposal however do not necessarily represent the views of the CRRA Board, CRRA members or other CRRA Technical Councils. For more information on GRC, go to: <>

Gary Liss
Fax: 916-652-0485

[GreenYes Archives] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]