Informational Report Regarding
Oakland Public Works Programs to
Equitably Deliver Illegal Dumping
Eradication, Enforcement, and
Education Programs Citywide
Kristin Hathaway
Assistant Director
Oakland Public Works, Bureau of Environment
Oakland Public Works - Equity in Illegal Dumping Programs Oakland operates multiple programs to remove debris from right of way areas and parks, however, debris removal alone has not served to stem the tide of illegal dumping. To address this issue equitably, the City must focus its resources on identifying and eliminating the source of the problem.
1. Understanding the source of illegal dumping to help shape a resolution that will lead to an equitable outcome.
2. Data shows Public Works collection services are equitably distributed.
3. Collection capacity by itself isn’t enough to remove illegal dumping or significantly remove debris in frontline communities. The equitable solution to eradication of illegal dumping must include targeted education and enforcement.
4. Equitable enforcement of the laws for public health and safety needs to be improved to address waste generators and illegal dumping.
5. Programs must understand the geographical landscape and its impact on illegal dumping in frontline and isolated communities.
6. Critical to remove economic barriers to trash service by implementing an equitable rate program for residential collection that does not award the more affluent with a lower rate for garbage service.
7. Need targeted education programs to increase the use of existing services for the legal disposal of waste and bulky items as alternatives to illegal dumping.
8. The importance of shifting public perception from blaming the responders to holding the dumpers socially and economically responsible for Illegally dumping material within the City of Oakland. • City of Oakland generated
218,791 tons of waste last
year, (excluding recyclable
or compostable materials,
or materials hauled to
transfer stations other than
Davis Street).
• 1/3 of waste is residential
and 2/3 of waste is
normally
commercial/business
waste.
Waste Generation Sources
• Waste Management of Alameda County (WMAC) is the
City’s exclusive franchise hauler for mixed solid waste and organic materials.
• California Waste Solutions (CWS) is the City’s exclusive franchise hauler for residential recyclable materials.
• Exceptions:
• Commercial businesses may hire non-exclusive
franchise (NEF) haulers to remove recyclable materials
from their properties.
• The City excludes construction and demolition debris
(C&D) from its exclusive franchise agreement. Has
issued over 30 non-exclusive Construction and
Demolition Franchise Agreements (CDNEFA)
• Haulers like 1-800 Got Junk can receive a business
license and provide removal and hauling services to
Oakland residents.
Waste Hauling – Exclusive Franchises and Other Haulers
Oakland’s Approach to Collecting Illegal Dumping
• Debris removal is primarily managed by Keep Oakland
Clean and Beautiful
• 58 budgeted full time equivalent positions
• 1 Supervisor II
• 3 Supervisor Is
• 15 Street Maintenance Leaders
• 1 Heavy Equipment Operator
• 38 Public Works Maintenance Workers.
• Fleet of 13 vehicles.
• Reactive Crew – Responds to Service Requests
• Proactive Crew – Clears debris on specific
routes. Some dumpers aware of these routes.
• Homeless Encampment Crew – Cleans at the
direction of the EMT
• 10 Bulky Block Parties annually
• Fiscal Year 2021-2022: approximately $13 million
spent on illegal dumping
• 2015: 1,587 tons - 2022: 9,477 tons
• Service Requests
• Reactive Work Orders
• Proactive Work Orders
• Council Districts 3, 6, and
7 consistently the most
impacted.
• Also consistently receive
the majority of debris
removal services, both
proactive and reactive.
Illegal Dumping by Council District
• Oakland Municipal Code Section
8.28.100 “Every owner of any premises
shall ensure that arrangements are made
to properly separate and dispose of the
solid waste…created, produced, or
accumulated on the premises, through
either maintaining a subscription for
regular solid waste collection service
from the MM&O collector or self-hauling
pursuant to a permit issued under
Section 8.28.115.”
• What the barriers are to proper trash
disposal – how can we remove them?
Property Owners’ Responsibility for Trash Service
2023 Curbside Bulky Pickup and Self-Haul to Davis Street • Curbside Appointments Top User: Districts 1, 4, and 6 • Self Haul Top Users: Districts 4, 6, 7
• Targeted education needed to increase use in Districts underutilizing the services Trash Cart Pilot Container Upsizing Program
• As of February 1, collaborating WMAC
to implement a Pilot Trash Cart
Upgrade Program.
• Provide residents, on one single trash
collection route that crosses Councils
Districts 6 and 7, along International
Boulevard, with larger trash containers
at no extra cost for three months.
• Will increasing the size of trash
containers without increasing cost will
help decrease overages and dumping?
Container Size Monthly Cost Per Gallon Cost
20 gallons $51.76 $2.59
32 gallons $58.77 $1.84
64 gallons $103.67 $1.62
96 gallons $155.79 $1.62
• Residents select the size of their trash container based on cost rather than need. • Customers who can only afford the smaller can are pay approximately 40% more in per gallon cost for waste disposal.
• As part of this effort OPW stepped up enforcement against nearby businesses, that were determined to lack mandatory trash collection service.
Equity in Trash Rates
Trash Cart Pilot Container Upsizing Program
Enforcement of Customers Without Trash Service
• Residential and Commercial Customers without service treated differently. • Residents without service or delinquent on payments deemed a nuisance. • Must pay or voluntarily establish service. If not, City can subscribe to service on behalf of the property owner and lien property to collect payment if necessary. • Commercial business without service or delinquent on payments simply cut off from service, left to deal with waste services on their own. • There is currently no mechanism in the OMC to collect payment from delinquent commercial property owners.
• Inequitable ability to enforce may be a significant factor in illegal dumping.
Ensuring Businesses Have Adequate Garbage Service
• Upwards of 1 in 6 businesses may not have trash
service.
• Pilot container upsizing program – Of 67 businesses, 13 correction notices sent to property owners of and
businesses on 11 properties (= 19% of the businesses
in the area).
• 5 – immediate compliance
• 3 - compliance following correction notices
• Remaining 3 - 2 business were closed, and 1 non-
compliant business will have trash service imposed upon them.
• Oakland Fresh - Looked at 1,214 businesses along
International Boulevard.
• 128 (11%) without garbage service. Staff has initiated the compliance process with those businesses.
• Economic disadvantage to the majority of businesses
who are in compliance.
Environmental Enforcement Unit
• 8 Environmental Enforcement Officers
(EEOs), 1 Clean Community Supervisor, 1
Administrative Analyst
• EEOs enforce illegal dumping restrictions
and regulations.
• Have citation authority to bring residents
and businesses into compliance with
Oakland Municipal Code (OMC) Section
8.28. • Various tactics to catch violators:
• Area patrols
• Forensic investigations of illegally
dumped piles of debris
• Monitoring video footage from illegal
dumping surveillance cameras
Street Litter
Container Abuse
• Most street containers are
located along commercial
corridors and near transit
stops.
• Data does not support that
additional street litter
containers = a cleaner area.
• In contrast often more
dumping by a street litter
containers – especially if
neighboring businesses not
subscribed to trash service.
• Litter containers were
developed to be in
commercial corridors.
• City should look at litter
container distribution to
include pedestrian path of
travel or transit hubs and
pathways.
Street Litter Containers
Litter Container Abuse
• EEOs investigate unlawful
dumping in or near street litter
containers.
• People placing excess debris in
and round litter containers can be
fined up to $750.00 for the first
offense, and $1,000.00 for the
second offense, and $1,500.00
for the third offense.
Surveillance Camera Program
• City Council approved OPW’s Illegal Dumping
Surveillance Camera Program on January 18,
2022
• Currently 16 portable cameras deployed
throughout the city.
• In July 2023, Council also approved staff to add
License Plate Reader Cameras to its program.
• Staff will report more details in annual
informational report on the Surveillance
Camera Program that will be brought to Council
in late spring 2024.
Enforcement Of Illegal Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris Haulers • Unscrupulous and illegally operating haulers contribute to the City’s illegal dumping problem.
• FY 2021-2022 City began enforcing C&D debris
hauling requirements for building permit holders if
hauler does not have City-issued non-exclusive
franchise (NEF) contract.
• NOV issued to building permit holder via Green Halo
System. Allows for penalty assessment if necessary.
• Amendment to OMC Section 15.34 (Ordinance No.
13745 C.M.S.) will increase the number of permitted
construction projects subject to C&D debris
requirements.
• Construction and small remodel projects in frontline
communities vulnerable to contractors not properly
disposing of construction and demolition.
Conclusions
• Data shows that the City is providing the majority of its limited resources for illegally dumped debris collection to those communities most impacted by dumping.
• Continuing to pick up the debris is not the long-term solution to the issue and may in certain cases exacerbate the problem.
Current Debris Pick-Up Practices
Residential Service Issues
• Residents throughout the City of Oakland have the same opportunity to properly dispose of their bulky item material, yet containerized services may be a contributing factor to illegal dumping. Pricing for containerized service is artificially cheaper by the gallon for those that can afford a larger container. • Cost of service for waste disposal also needs to be equitable and attainable for Oakland residents. Residents should be able to afford the service that they need for the number of people in their household and not be incentivized to contaminate other waste streams, hire unscrupulous haulers, or dump debris themselves on city streets.
• The pilot container upsizing program will yield data to help the City understand if cost-neutral upsizing citywide can help alleviate this burden on some households.
Conclusions
Businesses Service Issues
• Businesses or people conducting business that handle waste as a part of their service are abusing illegal dumping proactive and reactive services that the City provides by dumping or placing out materials in the right of way, knowing that the City crews will eventually pick them up.
• Street litter containers are also being abused by some business who utilize them for their waste removal rather than paying for trash service because there are no immediate mechanisms to make them abate the nuisance of not having trash service because they did not pay their trash bill. They are not forced into a special assessment, as are residential customers.
Conclusions
Targeted Education
• Targeted education by City Council district could significantly reduce the amount of illegal dumping by increasing the utilization of services. If services are clear, accessible, and affordable, there should be no need for anyone to dump debris in public areas. • Education campaigns to help understand what services are available need to be targeted to those communities who are utilizing the services at a lower rate per capita. • Campaigns need to engage with the residents in those areas to understand what the impediments or disincentives are to utilizing such services. • For example, the self-haul appoints at Davis Street transfer station are significantly underutilized, yet the monthly Bulky Block Parties that the City hosts at its Edgewater municipal corporation yard, that is only a short driving distance from Davis Street, consistently attract 300-400 vehicles per event that will wait in line, often for an hour or longer, to dispose of their debris.
Conclusions
Enforcement
• Enforcement should focus business that do not have service and businesses that operate and handle waste as a byproduct of services offered (for example, from home remodels and small projects).
• Enforcement needs to be equitable and concentrated in areas that are experiencing the most impacts. This equity can be determined by a strategic and data driven approach that identifies locations where the problem is most egregious. • By partnering with WMAC, the City can utilize data on businesses without garbage service and abused street litter containers to focus enforcement efforts and make a notable impact in those area.
• Most businesses, including small businesses, are doing the right thing by paying for trash service. They are being unfairly, economically, disadvantaged by those businesses that are not paying for the cost of this service. Businesses who are following the rules should not be the only ones who must account for the costs of operation, including waste disposal services.
Conclusions
Dynamic Program
• As the City looks at its approach and allocation of resources to address this issue, it will be important to track outcomes and make modifications to the approach as necessary.
• The management of this complex issue cannot be static and requires attention and vigilance by staff to learn from these initiatives and grow the program over time.
• To ensure equity it is important that achievements in one area of the city do not result in a deterioration of conditions in another area. The goal is to solve the issue rather than move it from location to location.
•
Conclusions