Orange County Grand Jury
• 2019-2020
Grand Jury 2019-2020 Oc Recycling: Doing it the Right Way
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
In nine of the ten cities investigated, the waste hauler has been the sole source provider to their respective city(s) anywhere from 39 to 72 years. Where there is an opportunity for service providers to compete, there is an opportunity for competitive bidding, which may result in improvements in cost and performance.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
All cities and county entities that do not have a contract review process in place should establish one to ensure regular reviews of service contracts are performed and that contract terms are still relevant as legislative changes are enacted. Serious consideration should be given to shortening the length of contracts to facilitate opportunities for competitive bidding where feasible. (F1)
F2
The labeling on residential bins are not always legible or have comprehensive enough instructions laminated or otherwise made a part of the lid, especially with regards to single use plastic shopping bags. Education and outreach efforts need to be reinforced as often as possible and a visual reminder on the recycle container will help alleviate confusion.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Orange County Waste and Recycling as well as the waste haulers provide helpful recycling education to the public where contractually required to do so. It is the Grand Jury’s view that most cities delegate much of the customers/public education efforts to the waste haulers. Contracts indicate both parties are responsible for educating the public.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Municipalities should ensure that recycle bins be labeled with comprehensive recycling instructions to facilitate proper sorting of waste (F2 and (F3).
F4
Cities are not in compliance with AB 341 mandates with respect to providing recycling containers for multi-family units.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Cities, that have not already do so, should implement the requirements of AB 341 as they pertain to multi-family recycling programs. Additionally, such programs need to be closely monitored by city contract administrators rather than relying solely on waste haulers to fulfill the mandates (F4).
Commendations 1
-
CM1In addition to having among the lowest rates for both residential and commercial trash service, the city of Irvine is one of only two interviewed cities with an aggressive multi-family recycle program. Further, they are the only interviewed city that does not charge commercial customers for servicing their recycling bins. The Grand Jury commends the city of Irvine for their commitment to recycling. For having a comprehensive and well-publicized organics residential recycling program in place full two years before required to do so by SB 1383, the Grand Jury commends the city of Orange. 2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 17 OC Recycling: Doing it the Right Way RESPONSES The following excerpts from the California Penal Code provide the requirements for public agencies to respond to the findings and recommendations of this Grand Jury report: §933 “(c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head or any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices....” §933.05. (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion 2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 18 OC Recycling: Doing it the Right Way by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d) A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. (e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. (f) A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. (Amended by Stats. 1997, Ch. 443, Sec. 5. Effective January 1, 1998.) 2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 19 OC Recycling: Doing it the Right Way
Agency Responses 8
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Orange County
County