From: Andrew Ryan
To: City Attorney's Office
Cc: Amourence Lee
Subject: Serious concerns with language on pending ordinance 7.32,070 ("Gardening Waste") Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 12:48:34 PM
City Attorney Rasiah,
I attended last night's council meeting and I have some questions about the language proposed in the new San Mateo Municipal Code section 7.32.070, "Gardening Waste". Of course I am strongly against anyone littering or dumping, but I am concerned that this new ordinance:
a) Will not prevent dumping, because dumping garden waste is already illegal in San Mateo, and
b) Introduces several ambiguous code enforcement areas that are likely to fall disproportionately on our Latino gardener community.
Ultimately, my fear is that, as currently written, this ordinance will be merely a tool to harass gardeners -- which in San Mateo means typically Latino, poor English speakers, and perhaps undocumented laborers -- without actually preventing or addressing any of the root causes of garden waste dumping.
To recap, here's the proposed language of 7.32.070 from last night's meeting: "No one shall blow, rake or cause gardening waste to be deposited into the streets of the City without being immediately removed. For purposes of this section, "gardening waste" shall mean leaves, grass clippings, weeds, plants, tree trunks, branches, wood shavings, dirt, and other vegetative or organic material produced from the care and maintenance of landscaped areas, gardens, and lawns. Provided, however, that this section shall not prohibit the storage of gardening waste in authorized receptacles for collection."
Here are my specific concerns:
1) This new code appears to be unnecessary, because San Mateo already prohibits dumping garden waste in section 7.32.210 (https://law.cityofsanmateo.org/us/ca/cities/san- mateo/code/7.32.210).
Can you give me an example of a single "garden waste dumping" scenario where 7.32.210 would not apply but 7.32.070 would apply?
Specifically the existing law says "No person shall dump or place or permit to be dumped or placed, any such garden solid waste, lawn cutting, shrub and tree trimmings or like solid waste or other waste materials, except in the manner provided in the rules and regulations for the collection of garden solid waste, upon any lot, land or street within the City." 2) The phrase "immediately removed" is poorly defined. In theory, this could mean "I can stand next to your gardener and call for a code violation the moment the garden waste hits the ground." When I do gardening and leaf remova., I sometimes let the material sit for several hours as I'm gathering it up, especially for large cleanup projects. I'm concerned that the "immediate" portion of this ordinance could be weaponized against gardeners or homeowners by their neighbors while gardeners are in the middle of their work. 3) The phrase "authorized receptacles" is completely undefined and ambiguous. What exactly are "authorized receptacles for gardening waste"? This is not defined anywhere in our municipal code. I should be able to use a Recology garden waste can, my own garbage can, or even just throw the solid waste in the bed of my truck. The intended point is that you don't leave waste behind on the street or dump it somewhere else. If you do keep the "authorized receptacles" language, at least define what an "authorized receptacle" actually is. Actually, I think the entire sentence could be struck, since if I'm storing garden waste in a receptacle then the waste is already not in the streets!
If we really want to stop garden waste dumping, I can't see how this new ordinance is going to do it. We already have an ordinance, this seems more like a problem of lack of enforcement, not lack of ordinances.
--andrew