we need to eliminate waste and not landfill it. unfortunately, san francisco leads the nationrecology's propr the best environmentally and economically, and i hope that you support it. thank you very much. chair chu: thank you. >> good afternoon, madam chair, supervisors. my name is paul. i am a manager for recology's landfill and composting facilities. chair chu: if i could ask you to speak into the microphone? >> sure, if there is one thing that i want to qualify, this is

a fully permitted landfill. we currently accept the waste from san francisco by truck, but we choose to go with the more environmentally friendly and state solution, and that is transporting the waist by -- and safe solution, and that is by transporting the waste by rail. we truly providing cleaner and safer alternative, of to three times or four times more -- up to three times or four times more. they have provided studies that suggest that there are environmental benefits, even above rail haul, but it just does not add up. what waste management is

proposing, they clearly marked in distribute things from their landfill -- clearly market and distribute things. this is essentially akin to a shell game. from a philosophical perspective, we greatly disagree with waste management's philosophy of disposing of organics in green wastes in the landfill. that does not make sense. -- and green wastes in the landfill. chair chu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, madam chair, members of the committee. i am the general manager for recology in marysville, california. the rail plan has support in

many places, including at the yuba centre of economic cooperation. there are improvements that will be provided. specifically, the rail process will be in it -- bring jobs and other things. we believe this is an opportunity for us to have a win-win situation for the citizens of san francisco and the county. one of the things that i would like to address is host fees. while they have been discussing those items, they have not been fully vetted. with that, i want to thank you for your time, and i appreciate the opportunity.

chair chu: thank you. i will call some more names. [reading names] >> hi, my name is doug, and i live in san francisco, and i do support recology for all of the work they have done with the department and with reducing the waste stream and with the department of public works for keeping this clean. i moved here in 1988, and the only place i could recycle was at the haight-ashbury community recycling center on frederick street, because nothing else was available. then, i got curbside pickup and blue bins, and then there was a green card so i could get rid of my food waste and scraps. it keeps us a green, are san francisco people green, and our

stuff goes into compost -- it keeps us green, our san francisco people green, but i am concerned about ostrom road, because i hope things do not go in there increase in methane. i am concerned about things other than dirt that cover. i would like to see it so it does not produce any methane anymore, especially if it is going to be commingled with san francisco waste. something came out last september that said that waste management was running their trucks on san francisco garbage. well, in the fine print, it is the historic waste. so, in closing, i think i would like to say harvey milk's

legacy. i wish i could take the dog poop and put it in this corn-based, disposable baggy and dispose of it properly. chair chu: thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> i am doug from a towing company. we are a local towing company and a supplier of services in san francisco. we support the proposal to reevaluate the city's proposals for the transport of municipal waste. i do not think anybody believes traffic congestion will improve in the near future, and this will produce a sizable number of trucks on highways. as a top-to-bottom company -- it makes more sense to use this method of transport. the cost of on one to transport

-- on one to transport -- unwanted transport. there are fewer vehicles on the highway and fewer emissions. thank you. chair chu: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am tina. i am not here either supporting or not supporting this. the city of pittsburgh would be more than willing to partner with san francisco as private partners to accept the barge. we have a land fill about 8 miles away, and it could be trucked from the waterfront in pittsburgh -- we have a landfill. i also want to take the opportunity. i used to work for the city and county of san francisco.

probably the most memorable experience i had there is that i was leading the way to review process in 2001, in fact when the program -- i was leading the rate review process, and it essentially gave noorcal -- norcal more profits. creating the diversion rates that san francisco currently has. and i wanted to say, in my experience, i worked with some really great people who used to be with a solid waste program, and i learned from them that what you do is you introduce an idea early, and you keep on it for a long time, and, eventually, you can change people's minds, and in this case, they worked with norcal for a long time about diverting it. i think in this case, over 10 years later, it is now 2011,

there may be a new paradigm shift, and it would be to relocate the transfer station to the porch, and right there at the pier, there is access to the waterfront, and there is a rail, which could provide alternative transportation, which could be part of the new vision. [bell] chair chu: thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. ken. we are in support of the agreement, and there has been a great deal of assessment and why this agreement should be approved. i would like to give you what our experience has been. we represent about 275 office buildings, about 75 million square feet of office space. we created with recology in the

past a high rise recycling program starting in 1987, which before it was ever required by law, and that kind of partnership kind recology, with the department of environment, which the city, and with the commercial community -- with the city has created the best recycling programs in the country. i think we can all be proud of that. in a way, you do not want to mess with success. this has been a long and laborious process, to find the place to put the residuals of what we do not recycle. but i think we have a good situation with a good partnership. the city has a good partnership with recology. the building owners' association has certainly had a very good relationship very recology, and we are their largest customer. , we probably produce it to%. we value their relationship. -- we probably produce 50%.

chair chu: thank you. next speaker. >> hello, supervisors, my name is -- you can look at the rule -- recology business card, and it says "waste zero." it kind of dovetails into what their proposal is all about. in terms of the prize, -- price you are saving over $100 billion. you do not want to waste that. on the environmental side, going from truck to rail, it saves 1 million gallons of fuel per year, and you do not want to waste that either.

and then third, in terms of the process, it has been going on for five years. and so, it has been slowly vetted along the way here. i know there are people who, late in the game, who might bring up new thoughts and new ideas -- people who come late in the game, but i encourage this committee to move forward with approval, because you do not really want to wait anymore -- waste anymore time, money, or fuel. -- any more time. chair chu: 50. >> -- thank you. >> hello. we were one of the first green

staffing firms. i also worked in yuba county for many years, and i feel strong about the development of that area as well as job creation in san francisco. i am heavily involved in the bay area, and i am particularly interested in companies doing their part in the green fields. -- field. recology is a 100%-owned company. they employ almost 1000 people here in san francisco. i think. recology -- i think that recology is the clear choice. 84 your time today. -- thank you for your time today. chair chu: thank you. >> i am with the small-business advocates and also the district

merchants, both of whom approve of this recology bid, and here is why. first of all, recology does a very good job for the city of san francisco. they are san francisco-based, which is important, and employee owned. san francisco has the highest rate of composting, thanks to recology. i am also the public affairs director for the small business network. they have not had an opportunity to vote on this yet. i feel quite certain that they would also support recology's bid. most important of all, san francisco has a policy of accepting the lowest bid, and recology is the lowest bidder, so i assure you that most of the citizens and the business people

in san francisco caulwell behind, in favor of this bid, so please do this. -- people in san francisco are well behind, in favor of this bid. chair chu: thank you. [reading names] next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisor chu, supervisors. i am here to speak in opposition. we are a community for the ultimate landfill. the landfill has been a good neighbor to our city by agreeing to limitations on traffic hours and generating revenue for programs that benefit livermore. preservation and recycling and diversion education. as over 1,500 acres of open

space and habitats -- habitat have been purchased and protected, and other funds of the generated from the landfill. funds provide grants to environmental science programs at local schools, as well as school recycling and composting infrastructure projects. san francisco represents nearly half of the solid-waste tonnage disposed at the landfill. losing your business will represent a significant funding reduction in this program that is irreplaceable. the city of livermore respectfully requests that the committee to explore waste disposal options that achieve all of its objectives, including those related to price as well as those representing the best environmental option. thank you. chair chu: thank you. next speaker. >> chairwoman chu, supervisor

mirkarimi, supervisor campos, i am here to support recology's bid. i am a residential ratepayers, and i am a commercial rate payer. -- i am a residential ratepayer. recology is the best that america has to offer and the best that san francisco has to offer. they have over 18 re-use and recycling programs that operate. working in partnership with the city and county of san francisco, they have helped us to meet our diversion goals, the best in the country. i understand. i am a native san franciscan. they are the best. we want them to do better. this thing about going to the ballot box. it appears to be, i hate to say this, supervisor mirkarimi, but

it sounds like you and i are the old-timers here, and i remember in the 1980's, there was another ballot initiatives against the garbage company. but what came of that? it was not until we decided to work with the garbage companies and work with recology that we have made great strides. recology is a great community partner peter through community events and community groups, they have helped to make our neighborhoods cleaner -- recology is a great unity partner. through community events and community groups, they have helped to make our neighborhoods cleaner. and they are working with residents and residents in knorr h.b. -- and north beach. recology is the best that san francisco has to offer, and i urge you to accept their bid.

thank you. chair chu: saint you. next speaker. >> -- thank you. next speaker. >> our firm is a waste facilitator, and what we do is reduce waste to the landfill. we work with waste management in alameda and all of the big companies around. i am here to say that the analysis report that was done is incorrect when it comes to rates, especially when speaking about the capacity, what it costs in oakland and what it costs in san francisco. now, what the committee for got to do is mention.

this is not offered in oakland. they need to look at all aspects. as far as i am concerned, i deal in wasting diversion. recology has the best in the nation. there is nobody better. i am very proud to deal with them, and the person and what they represent. chai8r chu: thank you. [reading names] >> good afternoon, my name is corrine. they have been a good community partner in many ways, but i do

not think this proposal is ready for prime time. this is achieved through a charter amendment with the rest use and disposal ordinance of 1932 or partially accomplished by instituting a transport system that does not involve transport of refuse with a transfer station through the streets of the city. this would be possible if the transfer station was on port property at pier 94, 96, right next recology's recycling center.

there alternatives that need to be considered. i think we need to investigate whether those concerns can be mitigated before a decision is made. at the very least, moving refuse from a transfer station by diesel truck across the bay bridge to a diesel locomotive makes no sense when biodiesel rail service is available in san francisco, right next door to pier 94,96. chair chu: thank you. >> my name is ken lewis. we are opposed to the awarding

of the contra. -- contract. first, the landfill since it -- consists of two areas, number one and number two. number two has led to be constructed. we are fully permitted to accept waste for at least 35 years from this point. i am here under the authority of another, saying that it time is an issue related to this, you need more time, and waste management would be happy to entertain this for a one to three-year period.

this must be addressed at all times. in terms of the discussion earlier, altamont is producing this each day. this is to suggest that we are offering some sort of shell game, and that is correct. thank you very much. chair chu: thank you. next speaker. >> a legal defense fund, of which i am with the san

francisco bay chapter of the you know which club. i was referred to by mr. beso as an on-again/off-again situation. it was a dispute, and i do not know that we need to go into that again. a color version of a chart that basically documents the bay area landfill capacity. there is really no need on the part of citizens in san francisco and businesses for a landfill outside of the bay area. san francisco is also not alone. they are very strong at recycling efforts, and there is cooperation to get a more effective regional operation, and i think there is time with the testimony that has been given about the usefulness of the existing contract with

altamont, getting away from what is being portrayed as binding the department of environment, so you do not need to feel bound. take the time to make the proper public decision. san francisco is not in ireland into itself. it is part of the san francisco bay region. i was a resident of berkeley, but i can to san francisco in 1968, the year that san francisco had to go outside the city for the first time. it went toaltamont -- it went to altamont. this is better than in a prime agricultural reason. finally, this is a questionable idea. chair chu: thank you. thank you.

thank you. next speaker. >> my name is cathy jamieson, and i and the regional human resources manager of -- and i am the regional human-resources manager of recology. among many reasons i have enjoyed my job, and as an hr representative and as an employee 0 owner of recology -- as an employee owner of recology -- we provide health benefits for opposite and same- sex domestic partners of our employee owners. three years later, in 1997, the city made domestic partner benefits a requirement for doing business with the city of san

francisco, necessarily others. also, in early 2000's, -- in early 2000, recology spearheaded some programs. 95% of them are employed in the community. each new employee is hired from the community. all together in the san francisco region, 300 of the employee owners live in san francisco. also, we have a 67% ethnically diverse work force.

san francisco- based recology in san francisco is good for san francisco. chair chu: thank you. next speaker. >> i have the president of local 10, longshoremen, in san francisco. i am here to urge you to not shut the door on the maritime alternative for the question that is put before you. i also bring you greetings from local 54, pittsburgh and stockton, and the union boatman's union, who work on tugs and barges. a maritime alternative, if you look at the advantages of it, it makes nothing but cents. it provides for a one-stop handling for the trucks. they com