San Diego County could raise waste disposal fee by $1 per ton – inewsource

Report on San Diego County Waste Disposal Fee and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

This report analyzes the proposal to increase San Diego County’s municipal solid waste disposal fee, a policy unchanged for 28 years. The current fee of $0.02 per ton is significantly lower than that of other California counties, generating minimal revenue. An increase, as advocated by local environmental organizations, presents a critical opportunity to fund programs that directly support the achievement of several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production).

Analysis of Current Waste Management Policy and its SDG Implications

Current Fee Structure and Revenue

San Diego County’s waste disposal fee has remained at $0.02 per ton since 1997. This rate generated approximately $70,000 last year, a sum primarily used for administrative oversight rather than proactive environmental initiatives. This stagnant policy fails to address inflationary pressures or the escalating costs of sustainable waste management, thereby hindering progress toward key environmental targets.

Proposed Fee Adjustment for Sustainable Development

A coalition of environmental advocates, including the Solana Center for Environmental Innovation and the Sierra Club, has proposed increasing the fee to $1.02 per ton. This adjustment is projected to generate an estimated $3.4 million annually. This revenue would be instrumental in financing programs aimed at achieving sustainable waste management objectives.

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: The primary goal of the increased revenue would be to fund initiatives that reduce landfill waste, directly supporting SDG Target 12.5, which aims to substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling, and reuse.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: By properly managing municipal waste, the county can advance SDG Target 11.6, which focuses on reducing the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities.

Alignment with State Mandates and Broader SDG Framework

Compliance with Environmental Legislation

California state laws, such as the 1989 mandate to reduce landfill waste and the 2016 law to reduce organic waste, require significant investment from local jurisdictions. The proposed fee increase provides a dedicated funding mechanism to help the county meet these legal obligations, which are in themselves aligned with the SDGs.

1. Organic Waste Reduction (SDG 13: Climate Action): Reducing organic waste in landfills is crucial for mitigating methane emissions, a potent greenhouse gas. Funding programs to divert organic waste supports SDG 13 by taking direct action to combat climate change.
2. Public Education and Outreach (SDG 12): As noted by Zero Waste San Diego, a portion of the funds could be used for public education campaigns to promote sustainable consumption patterns and proper waste disposal, fostering a culture of resource efficiency.

Comparative Analysis: Best Practices in California

Benchmarking Against Peer Counties

Several California counties have implemented significantly higher waste disposal fees to successfully fund environmental programs, offering a model for San Diego.

• San Mateo County: $9.89 per ton
• Santa Clara County: $4.10 per ton
• Alameda County: $4.34 per ton

Outcomes of Progressive Fee Structures

These counties utilize the revenue generated from higher fees to make substantial progress on their environmental goals, demonstrating a direct link between fiscal policy and sustainability outcomes. Funds are allocated to recycling, composting, and waste reduction programs that serve as practical applications of SDG principles.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The proposal to increase San Diego County’s waste disposal fee from $0.02 to $1.02 per ton represents a strategic opportunity to align fiscal policy with local and global sustainability commitments. Adopting this change would create a dedicated revenue stream to fund essential programs that advance SDG 11, SDG 12, and SDG 13. It would enable the county to meet state environmental mandates, reduce landfill dependency, and foster a more sustainable and resilient community, transforming a nominal administrative charge into a powerful tool for environmental stewardship.

1. SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• The article focuses on municipal waste management, a core component of sustainable urban living. The discussion revolves around San Diego County’s low waste disposal fee and the need to raise it to fund programs aimed at reducing landfill waste. This directly relates to making cities and human settlements more sustainable by improving waste management systems.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• The core issue is the management of waste generated by consumption. The article highlights the need for programs that reduce waste, encourage reuse, and promote recycling and composting. Laura Anthony of Zero Waste San Diego is quoted as saying the goal is to stop throwing “valuable resources” that could be reused into the landfill, which directly aligns with the principles of responsible consumption and production patterns.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

• The article describes a partnership between civil society organizations (Solana Center for Environmental Innovation, the Sierra Club, Zero Waste San Diego) and a public entity (the San Diego County Board of Supervisors). These groups are collaborating and advocating for policy changes (increasing the waste disposal fee) to achieve shared environmental goals, demonstrating a multi-stakeholder partnership in action.

2. Specific SDG Targets Identified

Target 11.6: Reduce the environmental impact of cities

• The full target is: “By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.” The entire article is a discussion about improving municipal waste management in San Diego County. The proposal to raise the disposal fee is a mechanism to fund programs that would directly reduce the environmental impact of waste.

Target 12.5: Substantially reduce waste generation

• The full target is: “By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse.” The article explicitly mentions that other counties, like San Mateo, use funds from higher fees for “recycling, composting and reducing waste.” The advocacy in San Diego aims to fund similar programs to educate the public on waste reduction and prevent “valuable resources” from ending up in landfills, directly supporting the goals of prevention, reduction, and reuse.

Target 17.17: Encourage effective partnerships

• The full target is: “Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.” The article details the advocacy efforts of environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Zero Waste San Diego presenting their proposal to the County Board of Supervisors. The subsequent meeting between county staff and these environmentalists exemplifies the formation of a public-civil society partnership to address a sustainability challenge.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied

• Waste disposal fee per ton: The article provides concrete figures that serve as a financial indicator for funding sustainability initiatives. The current fee is 2 cents per ton, and the proposed fee is $1.02 per ton. This can be used to measure the financial commitment to waste management programs.
• Annual revenue from waste disposal fees: This is a direct measure of the financial resources available for environmental programs. The article states the current fee generates just under $70,000 annually, while the proposed fee would bring in around $3.4 million. Progress can be measured by the increase in this revenue.
• Percentage of waste diverted from landfills: While not giving a current figure for San Diego, the article mentions a 1989 California law requiring a 50% reduction in waste sent to landfills. This percentage is a key performance indicator for measuring the success of waste reduction, recycling, and composting efforts funded by the proposed fee increase.
• Compliance with organic waste reduction laws: The article mentions a 2016 state law requiring the reduction of organic waste in landfills. The ability of the county to comply with this law, funded by the new fee, would be a measurable indicator of progress towards both waste reduction and climate action (as organic waste produces methane).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: inewsource.org