> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Trash talk produces little
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/trash-talk-produces-little/
- Published: 2004-01-22T16:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-23T03:37:55.000Z
- Author: John Wood
- Tags: Government & Politics, Santa Monica, #archive-import

*City Council wants garbage analysis overhauled*

COUNCIL CHAMBERS — City officials on Tuesday trashed an analysis that was aimed at sorting out Santa Monica’s rubbish concerns, leaving a messy situation no closer to being sealed up.

The City Council was supposed to discuss whether the city’s trash business should continue to be run by the city, be farmed out to a private contractor, or if an alternative should be explored.

Instead, several council members said City Hall workers failed to provide enough information on the subject, a point of contention for at least eight years.

“I think we need more analysis and that’s what I thought we were getting tonight,” City Councilman Herb Katz said. “The presentation is lovely, it’s nice — it doesn’t do much for me tonight.”

> “The presentation is lovely, it’s nice — it doesn’t do much for me tonight.” — — HERB KATZ City Councilman

Officials told staff last year to do an analysis of what’s involved in privatizing trash collection versus keeping it under City Hall’s control. A private trash comp-nay has long lobbied to take over the operation, but the council also has considered building a new multi-million dollar transfer station, to be operated by City Hall.

How trash is dealt with in Santa Monica could impact everything from rates residents and businesses pay for collection to land use issues, environmental policies and bottom line revenue for City Hall. No date has been set for the matter to return to the City Council.

Farming out the work to a contractor would likely be less expensive at first, while freeing up space at the city yards for other uses. Keeping it under government control would likely be more expensive at first, but would allow City Hall more control in establishing progressive environmental policies.

As part of its action, the council directed city workers to do a comparative analysis of those two options, as well as look at a public-private partnership and a fourth scenario — joining a consortium of cities that deal with their trash collectively. For each option, analysts were asked to examine service quality, land use efficiency, environmental implications, cost and fairness to city workers.

Craig Perkins, the city’s director of environmental and public works management, said a new garbage and recycling transfer station, constructed and operated by City Hall, would cost $605,771 a year for the next 20 years. He said there wouldn’t be a fee hike and added that the proposed 136,000-square-foot facility — called “Santa Monica Active Recycling Recovery Transfer Station” — would have added room to sort out recyclables. It also would have nearly five times the maneuvering space for trucks, which currently clog the adjacent roadways.

But officials from Southern California Disposal, which for years has lobbied City Hall to take over some of the trash processing work, said they can do the same job at a lower cost, saving City Hall — and area residents and businesses — a substantial amount of money.

City Councilman Ken Genser showed a videotape he said was given to him by workers at SCD. The tape appeared to show city workers at the yards mixing green waste with construction debris, among other actions that seemed to be counterproductive and sloppy. Gus Guzzetti, the city’s materials recovery superintendent, maintained that city employees were doing their work in an appropriate manner and said the film only showed part of what was really going on.

Genser later said Guzzetti seemed credible. “Clearly, things we’re being mixed... When I saw it initially, I thought it showed a lot of things that shouldn’t have happened,” Genser said. “We’ll keep discussing it and keep understanding it. There may be explanations for some things — and there may not be.”

In the end, the council voted 6-1 to send the matter back for more analysis, with all members but City Councilman Mike Feinstein saying they needed a more thorough understanding of the financial implications. City Manager Susan McCarthy defended the work done by her staff.

“We’re not wedded to any position, but... we feel that there’s a bright path and that’s what you pay us to ferret out,” McCarthy told council members. “You’ve given us some new cards to look at, and we’re going to toss them up in the air and see where they land.”

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/55/9f/559f9abc-8372-4a2e-8c2d-27386da4e363/content/images/2026/10/012204-03_01-7.jpg)

(Photo: Carolyn Sackariason/Daily Press)

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on January 22, 2004.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/012204.pdf?ref=smdp.com)