Fed-Up Council Close to Telling Company Its Compost Plan Is Trash

It must have seemed like a good idea at the time.

But after five years of wrangling and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal and consulting fees, the city of Los Angeles is just about ready to give up on a controversial proposal to turn 850 tons of garbage a day into compost that would be sold for a host of industrial and agricultural uses.

After some heated debate and occasionally angry testimony, the City Council on Tuesday gave the proponent of the plan just eight more weeks to make its best and final contract offer.

‘Everyone Is Fed Up’

City officials who have been attempting to negotiate a contract with California Co-Composting Systems Inc. recommended that the council drop the entire matter immediately.

Councilwoman Gloria Molina wrapped up the feelings of most of her colleagues when she finally declared in frustration, “Everyone is fed up with this.”

But the politically well connected firm, with its bevy of lobbyists busily working the council chamber, was able to keep the idea alive.

The reprieve from a city administrative office request to drop the project may be for naught as many city officials question whether the company will ever be able to make good on its promises.

California Co-Composting has proposed mixing city garbage with sludge from the Hyperion or Terminal Island sewage plants to form a compost material. Similar materials are produced in Europe and used in construction of highway retaining walls, non-food soil projects and in high-tech air pollution “scrubber” devices.

Former Lobbyist

Joaquin Acosta, founder of California Co-Composting and a former lobbyist who has given more than $25,000 in campaign contributions to council members since the compost project was first considered in 1983, said in an interview that he is also negotiating with six other California cities and counties that he would not identify.

The company has no working composting facility but has effectively produced state legislation during the past several years.

In 1985 California Co-Composting successfully sponsored legislation encouraging state departments to use its products in place of cinder blocks and similar products.

In 1987 it successfully sponsored legislation for the state to coordinate tests to determine whether its products are suitable for state use.

And in the current session, the company sponsored a bill that seeks to establish a composting facility on a state prison site.

City Administrative Officer Keith Comrie told the council that while California Co-Composting claims to want nothing more than the city’s garbage--and a nominal fee for hauling it away--that is not what they have tried to negotiate.

“When they come to the table, it’s never anything like that,” said Comrie.

Comrie told the council that California Co-Composting’s proposals would leave the city holding the bag for millions of dollars in bonds and liable for any cost overruns for construction of a production plant. The firm wants the city to provide the credit for the project, he said.

Acosta, who said he has already spent $2.8 million on the proposal and has backers ready to pour in $18 million to $20 million more, denied Comrie’s accusation. He said he would be satisfied with a simple contract guaranteeing a supply of city garbage and sludge for 25 years and a fee of $17 to $55 a ton to take it away.

“We’d love the simple approach,” Comrie agreed. “And they keep selling it (to the council) on that basis.”

California Co-Composting has until May 15 to deliver a take-it-or-leave-it contract to the city. The city administrative officer then has 30 days to produce a report on the contract for the council to consider and take to a final vote.