San Mateo County Grand Jury • 2008-2009

Issue | Background | Findings | Conclusions | Recommendations | Responses | Attachments Pilfering of Curbside

Published: August 29, 2008 10 pages
Ver PDF original

Findings and Recommendations 7 findings

F1
South Bayside Waste Management Authority and Allied Waste a. SBWMA is a joint powers authority with twelve member agencies (the cities of Belmont, Burlingame, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Menlo Park, Redwood City, San Carlos and San Mateo, the towns of Atherton and Hillsborough, the County of San Mateo, and the West Bay Sanitary District) formed to provide cost effective waste reduction, recycling, and solid waste programs to member agencies through franchised services and other recyclers. b. Currently, Allied Waste is the waste management service franchised by SBWMA to collect waste for member cities. c. According to state law, recyclables placed by the curbside can only be collected by agents duly authorized by cities and counties. Allied Waste is such an agent. d. All revenues received by Allied Waste from the recyclables are transferred to SBWMA. e. SBWMA ultimately distributes this revenue back to its members to offset garbage rates. f. Neither Allied Waste nor SBWMA are affected financially, either positively or negatively, when pilfering occurs. g. Neither Allied Waste nor SBWMA have taken action to reduce curbside pilfering. h. SBWMA member rates are based on an expected share of revenue from recyclables and fees. If the revenue is reduced sufficiently, individual SBWMA members could be forced to increase fees to cover the revenue shortfall. The South Bay Waste Management Association is a Joint Powers Authority. A Joint Powers Authority is an institution in which two or more public entities or governments can operate collectively. See Finding 1a. p.2. of this report for a full description of SBWMA. 2 i. Allied Waste claims that the amount of recyclables collected has been reduced by about 25% over the last four years. j. Revenues from recyclables have, nevertheless, increased because resale prices for recyclable materials have dramatically increased.2
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Coastside Scavenger a. Coastside Scavenger, a privately owned waste management service, is the duly authorized agent to collect waste in Pacifica. Coastside Scavenger differs from Allied Waste and SBWMA in the way it operates with regard to pilfering. i. Coastside Scavenger depends, in part, on the sale of recyclables for its revenues, and believes it is being negatively impacted by curbside pilfering. ii. Coastside Scavenger has reported incidents of pilfering to the police.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Reduction of Recyclables Coastside Scavenger and Allied Waste were unable to quantify the percentage of the reduction in collected recyclables that is due to pilfering. Aside from pilfering, individuals, non-profits and businesses divert a portion of recyclables from the waste stream by selling directly to independent buy-back agents, who are agents that purchase materials directly from the general public.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Curbside Pilfering in Pacifica and Menlo Park a. Pacifica, like most cities in San Mateo County, does not have a special ordinance against curbside pilfering. However, Pacifica Police consider pilfering to be theft. b. Four reports of pilfering were received by the Pacifica Police in one month, from July 29 to August 29, 2008, with five suspects involved. Three of those four reports came from Coastside Scavenger. Two of the suspects were issued misdemeanor citations. One was arrested and booked for an outstanding warrant on other charges, as well as, the pilfering charge. The case involving two suspects was referred to the San Mateo County District Attorney for prosecution. c. Menlo Park, which is a member of SBWMA, has two ordinances that pertain to pilfering: i. Municipal Code 7.04.040 gives the right to collect garbage exclusively to those having a contract with the City. ii. Municipal Code 7.04.080 states that it is unlawful and an infraction for any person not having a contract to take curbside garbage or recyclables. 2 http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080920/news_1n20scavenge.html 3 d. Menlo Park issues citations to pilferers, as is done with parking tickets, without reporting the crime as a theft to the San Mateo District Attorney. e. The Menlo Park Police believe that issuing citations has been effective, but a local neighborhood-group posting disagrees. The posting, in part, reads: “Although this is technically illegal activity, asking police to do something about this is futile.” (Attachment 2) f. From June to September 2008, two cases of pilfering were reported in Menlo Park.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Adopting an ordinance against pilfering which: i. Allows police to issue a citation, as is done with parking violations, without reporting the incident to the San Mateo County District Attorney as a theft. ii. Includes effective financial consequences to pilferers, remembering that pilfering is a continuous enterprise. 5 iii. Does not preclude the police, at their discretion, from forwarding pilfering cases to the District Attorney.
F5
Mitigation a. Two upcoming changes may affect curbside pilfering: i. A new California law, AB 1778, will go into effect on January 1, 2009, and is designed to “deter the theft of recyclables by requiring recyclers to obtain identifying information of individuals who bring in more than $50 worth of CRV recyclables and newspapers. It also requires that payments of $50 or more be made by check.” (Attachment 4) ii. Single stream recyclable collection is due to be implemented in January 2011 by SBWMA and Coastside Scavenger. This collection process may make pilfering more difficult because all recyclables will be co-mingled and collected in one large, lidded bin. b. Agencies interviewed suggested the following ideas for curtailing curbside pilfering. i. A model anti-pilfering ordinance allowing pilferers to be cited and fined should be created and passed by all the cities and the County. Police would then have the flexibility to cite violators under either the new uniform ordinance or existing theft criminal codes. ii. The imposed fines should be large enough to act as a deterrent. iii. A public education campaign is needed to help residents understand the possible relationship of their garbage bills to pilfering and to encourage residents to report curbside pilfering to the police.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Curbside pilfering elsewhere: The Grand Jury learned from newspaper articles and police websites that in other cities in California and the United States, curbside pilfering is widely reported as a problem. (Attachment 3) 4 Conclusions The 2008-2009 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury concludes that:
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The problem of curbside pilfering is not a public-safety threat but does concern residents, as evidenced by emails in Attachments 1 and 2.
No recommendations for this finding

Additional Recommendations 3

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

Conclusions 7

No Responses Found 2

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Menlo Park City
San Mateo County District Attorney Elected County Office