Principal Investigators: Alex Slaymaker & Florian Checco

July 2015

Illegal Dumping in Cincinnati, Ohio Threat Drivers & Actionable Solutions

“The Everyday Department.”

1

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

CINCINNATI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES ....................................................................................................................................... 4

ILLEGAL DUMPING ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

REPORTING ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7

ENFORCEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 11

HAMILTON COUNTY ................................................................................................................................................................................. 15

THE STATE & JURISDICTIONS ................................................................................................................................................................... 16

KEY DRIVERS ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 17

FURNITURE & PERSONAL BELONGINGS .............................................................................................................................................. 18

TIRES .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25

HOUSEHOLD TRASH: ........................................................................................................................................................................... 27

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ............................................................................................................................................................... 28

CRIME CORRELATION ............................................................................................................................................................................... 29

OHIO BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES .................................................................................................................................................... 31

STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 34

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 43

DEFINITIONS............................................................................................................................................................................................. 44

KEY CONTACTS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 45

ADDITIONAL DATA ................................................................................................................................................................................... 46

Solid Waste Collection DPS 2003-2014 ............................................................................................................................................... 46

Illegal dumping Service Request Seasonality Graph and Chart: .......................................................................................................... 47

RESOURCES .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 48

What goes where? (List of where items can be diposed of created for Cincinnatians) ...................................................................... 48

Vacant Foreclosed Residential Property Registration Link: ................................................................................................................. 50

City of Cincinnati Waste Fine Structure: .............................................................................................................................................. 50

Friday Blitz Schedule: ........................................................................................................................................................................... 52

City Code: ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 52

State Code: .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 55

Law Enforcement Guide to Scrap Tires (OEPA, 2011): ........................................................................................................................ 57

3

INTRODUCTION

Figure 1 Photo shows an illegal dumping site on a minor roadway contaminated with tires, construction materials,

and yard waste. Vacant structure in background neighbors an occupied residence.

**Note: All dates in report reflect the Fiscal Year unless otherwise stated.

Illegal Dumping presents a serious threat to

citizen health and safety, as well as economic

vitality and community revitalization in

Cincinnati, Ohio. Everyone involved in City

operations, community development, health,

safety, or economic growth understands this to

be true. Inadequate funding, outdated logistics,

disconnected stakeholders, and convoluted

politics create a truly complex problem. This

report was created with input from over 60

stakeholders in the City of Cincinnati and

Hamilton County from all walks of life.

Input from citizens, industry groups, local and

state public employees, private entities, and

community organizations is compiled in this

report to tell the story of how we currently

manage our illegal dumping problem, and how

we should. It may take a town to raise a child,

and it definitely takes a joint City and County

operation to design and implement solutions for

illegal dumping. The purpose of compiling city

processes, drivers, and potential solutions

relevant to dumping into one report is to

mobilize key stakeholders to create a cleaner,

safer, thriving, more beautiful city.

4

CINCINNATI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES

Figure 2 Collage shows a sampling of DPS responsibilities including bulk item pick-up, trash collection, improper trash set-out citations, and illegal dumping abatement.

order to operate efficiently at 100% staffing for

current positions. The Neighborhood Operations

Division (NOD) slim staff of 125 active

employees are responsible for trash collection,

yard waste removal, green space maintenance,

dead animal removal, graffiti abatement, and

street sweeping. There is no direct fee issued

for standard curbside trash collection or bulk

pick-up, instead these services are appropriated

through the general fund and estimated to cost

$8.91 monthly per resident. In comparison, the

suburbs of Norwood and Mariemont exceed

$12.00 per month, at $12.25 and $14.25

respectively. Also, Cleveland charges $8.00 and

Dayton $9.78 for comparable services. Thus,

Cincinnatians who dispose of waste illegally are

not fueled by an unreasonably high cost. Large

items are currently collected by NOD’s lightning

loader truck and taken to a local landfill (see

Resources for list of where to take different

items). Over 22,000 free bulk item pick-ups were

scheduled in 2014 over the phone with a

maximum of five items per collection. In

addition, NOD will collect up to four tires a year

per home for free through bulk collection.

The Queen City spans 79.5 mi2 (206.01 km2) of

land along the Ohio River bordering Kentucky

and is home to 52 unique community-declared

neighborhoods with almost 300,000 residents. A

large selection of urban parks, high tree cover,

and a hilly terrain provide an extraordinary

backdrop to everyday life but also many

opportunities to dump illegally without being

seen. Charged with governing this post-

industrial City, the municipal government budget

is divided roughly into three slices: ⅓ for Police,

⅓ for Fire, and ⅓ for all other services including

the Department of Public Services (DPS). This

Department handles everything from the City’s

fleet and buildings to road maintenance, street

cleaning, litter pick-up, trash collection, and

green space just to name a few. Although these

requirements have increased in the last few

years due to harsher winters and degrading

infrastructure, DPS staff has been cut by ⅓

since 2008. Furthermore, due to significant

physical demands, line worker turnover is high,

sick days are frequently used, and workers are

looking for opportunities to promote. To this

point, DPS would need to be staffed at 120% in

5

In response to decreased resources, the

creative team at DPS implemented a series of

frugal innovations. For example, NOD reduced

garbage collection from five to four days leaving

Fridays for training and an aggressive blight

remediation program called Friday Blitz

(Schedule in Resources). Starting in April 2015,

NOD schedules a weekly neighborhood Blitz.

Program coordinator Jude Johnson reaches out

to community councils to plan their Blitz. Then,

Johnson coordinates the placement of 2 to 4

roll-off dumpsters in locations requested by

community councils on Tuesday of their Blitz

week. As the dumpsters fill up, NOD personnel

empty them and drop new dumpsters. This

opportunity to dispose of waste continues until

Friday. On Friday, NOD crews work to clean up

blighted streets and areas.

Each Blitz is staffed by about 45 NOD staff

members. One Blitz in East and Lower Price Hill

resulted in over 20 tons of trash and 313 tires

collected for free (see Chart on following page).

During 17 neighborhood ‘Blitzes’ from April 24th

to July 17th, a total of 782 tires and over 175

tons of material have been collected. Therefore,

each Blitz averages a substantial 10 tons of

material collected.

Each roll-off truck must load the roll-off on to the

truck, drive from the NOD ‘garage’ in

Cumminsville to the desired location, drop the

roll-off, and return to the garage which takes a

total of 20-60 minutes depending on how far the

neighborhood is. Then, each truck must return

to the site every time the roll-off is filled in that

Figure 3 Photo shows one of four DPS roll-off trucks.

Blitz which is usually 2 or 3 times per 40 yard

roll-off. If the truck arrives and the roll-off

dumpster is overflowing, they must call in the

lightning loader to remove the debris sticking out

so the dumpster may be tarped. Finally, the

truck must drive to Republic Service’s transfer

station in Evendale to drop off the load and then

return to their garage which may take 40

minutes to 2 hours. Driving from the transfer

station back to the garage alone takes 20-30

minutes depending on traffic.

Combined, the whole process of dropping and

disposing of one dumpster may take up to three

hours based on distance and traffic. With only 3

trained truck drivers and 4 roll-off trucks in the

fleet, expanding service would require increased

staffing and possibly the purchase of more

equipment. This type of department-specific

logistical knowledge helps stakeholders

understand why ‘just adding more dumpsters’ is

not currently a viable solution.

Figure 4 Photo from Jude Johnson shows a Blitz dumpster which will need leveled off and tarped.

6

Figure 5 Chart shows data provided by Jude Johnson at NOD from the entire Blitz program to-date. Packer Tonnage

refers to materials from corner cans, community members, and Blitz workers picked up by Packer (garbage) trucks. It

should be noted ‘Loader Tonnage’ refers to the lightning loader which collects bulk-items and takes excess materials

off dumpsters. When this value is zero, the Loader was being used for another purpose that day. Also, these tires are

only those found on Friday so the number collected is likely even higher. Below photos from Jude Johnson show Blitz

workers doing the extremely physical, and sometimes dangerous work of abating large dump sites.

7

ILLEGAL DUMPING

REPORTING

Private property requests are the responsibility

of land owners. Also, land between a private

property and right of way is the responsibility of

the adjacent property owner. Citizens frequently

confuse public and private property when

reporting, leading to slower abatement as the

service request is transferred between units.

Although reported illegal dumping cases and

actual dumpsites vary, data recorded through

reporting is used to analyze the current state of

dumping. There is no measure developed which

captures a more accurate number of sites in the

City. Before presenting Data from this source,

said nuances must be taken into account.

What is Illegal Dumping & What is Litter?

Depends who you ask… Section 729 defines dumping as depositing any

type of waste into water or on ground at site unlicensed as solid waste facility.

Sec. 714 defines litter as garbage, trash, waste, rubbish, ashes, cans, bottles, wire, paper, cartons, boxes, automobile parts, furniture, glass, or anything else of an unsightly or unsanitary nature which when not properly disposed of creates a danger to public health, safety and welfare. This sounds like dumping.

DPS defines dumping as illegal discard out of a vehicle which is likely a greater volume than common litter like candy wrappers, cigarettes, and fast food (which is classified as litter).

To make matters more confusing, illegal dumping defined by Litter and Weeds Code Enforcement is waste discarded on private property when the culprit is known. But, private property dumping without a culprit is considered failure to maintain property free of litter.

Nuances in something as simple as definitions can lead to confusion and inefficiency.

DPS offers weekly curbside collection, Rumpke

provides a commercial curbside collection

service, and other options also exist for citizens

to dispose of items. However, these services

aren’t always utilized. In response, another

responsibility of Public Services is illegal

dumping investigation and abatement.

Residents and non-residents who are either

unwilling to use, or unaware of responsible

waste disposal options commonly dump their

waste on vacant lots, isolated locations,

overgrown green space, alleys, unoccupied

properties, apartment building dumpsters, and

less-traveled roads. According to anecdotal

evidence from Keep Cincinnati Beautiful,

dumpers are usually males ages 20 to 50 and

most commonly utilize pick-up trucks or vans to

transport waste. Behavioral motives behind the

choice not to dispose of waste properly are

detailed in the Key Drivers section of this report.

Citizens report illegal dumping and illegal

dumpsites on private and public property to DPS

through a myriad of channels including

telephone, cell phone app, and a website. These

technologies and the data generated is operated

and managed through Cincinnati Area

Geographic Information Systems (CAGIS).

Service requests are directed to appropriate

stakeholders based on private and public

property classification. Once reported, public

property dumping service requests are sent to

NOD’s Greenspace team within DPS for

investigation and remediation. However, some

roadway greenspace is the responsibility of the

Ohio Department of Transportation or the Parks

Department.

8

Increasing Data Quality Illegal dumping reporting captured through CSR created poor quality data of little use to DPS for analysis. Since the City is currently developing a new version of their App, DPS saw this as an opportunity to update this process among others. Also, service requests for Litter were changed in order to reduce misreporting of dumping as litter. This example shows how strategic low difficulty solutions like changing language and options given for questions on reporting app may have a big impact in terms of improving data quality, process flow, and ease-of-use. Version 2.0 of this App scheduled to launch in Fall 2015 will be called ‘Fix it Cincy!’

Figure 6 At 5916000.com citizens see these options and more for reporting, mapping, and searching previous SRs.

dumped on in the city (see Figure 7). But, this

conclusion is premature for a multitude of

reasons. Consider the number of residents who

are unaware of these reporting options,

misreport dumping as litter, are immune to the

problem due to constant exposure, or feel too

disempowered to act. These communities may

not have less dumping than EPH, but the data

suggests this assumption to be true. Ironically,

more reporting may actually represent increased

community organization, pride, and ownership of

a problem which is decreasing or visa versa. For

example, neighborhoods like North Fairmount

are not shown as hotspots for dumping based

on service requests displayed in Figure 7.

Furthermore, since the App’s launch in 2012

and the rise of internet access, reporting may

have increased simply due to increased

reporting capabilities. When residents decide to

call, 40% hang-up before speaking to staff due

to wait times. The Citizen Service Request

(CSR) Call Center staff at DPS have been cut

from 12 to 3 since the 2008 recession, while the

volume of requests increased. Furthermore,

after these recession cuts Call Center hours

decreased from 24/7 to 5 days a week from 7

am-5 pm (excluding holidays), thus limiting

accessibility to residents without internet access

or attempting to schedule bulk item pick-up. For

these reasons, DPS is transitioning to a more

electronic system and the City is exploring the

implementation of a 3-1-1 type reporting option

similar to other cities across the nation. The

following maps show changes in the number of

service requests for illegal dumping submitted

for each neighborhood between 2013 and 2015.

Data is not adjusted for neighborhood

population since it is not tracked between

Census years.

Some mobilized and organized communities are

very active reporters. For example, East Price

Hill (EPH) community members and business

organizations report frequently which may make

their community look like one of the most

9

Figu

re 7

Map

sh

ow

s h

ow

man

y re

qu

ests

fo

r ill

ega

l du

mp

ing

we

re s

ub

mit

ted

in e

ach

ne

igh

bo

rho

od

fro

m 2

013

-20

14

. Fo

r co

mp

aris

on

, th

e su

bse

qu

ent

map

dep

icts

th

e sa

me

dat

a ty

pe

for

201

4-2

01

5. N

eigh

bo

rho

od

s in

wh

ite

had

no

re

qu

ests

.

Yet, Cincinnati citizens and DPS staff sharing

experiential evidence suggest the contrary. That

being said, a reported decline in dumping within

Northside and other areas experiencing

increased devlopment, community pride, and

reporting may accuratefly reflect a decline in

actual dumping. Northside’s culture of citizen

engagement, acceptance, and social

connectvity are key ingredients required for a

real reduction in dumping and other crimes.

10

11

ENFORCEMENT

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Illegal Dumping Service Request Seasonality 2010-2015

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Figure 8 Graph above illustrates seasonality of illegal dumping reporting. Enlarged graph and table included in Additional Data section at end of report.

The below graph and chart suggest seasonality

of illegal dumping reporting. Overall, each year

experiences a downward trend from August to

December. Although the data shows variability,

illegal dumping reporting generally peaks during

the summer months and declines during the

winter. As weather patterns continue to become

less predictable and warmer, dumping

fluctuations will likely increase. During the winter

fewer people spend less time outside and fewer

opportunities to see dumpsites or dumpers

which may lead to decreased reporting without

an actual decrease in dumping. The bulk of

University move-out affiliated dumping is

generated during late April and early May,

contributing to the spike.

Service requests for dumping on private

property are sent to Litter & Weeds Code

Enforcement (LWCE), a division located within

DPS. This service was part of the Health Dept.

until Spring of 2015. Code Enforcement has 5

Officers divided geographically between the

City’s 52 neighborhoods to handle weed and

litter complaints under ordinances 714, 729, and

731. Each Officer handles 15 complaints a day

on average.

Ordinance 714 regulates littering, 729 for trash

collection/ set-outs/ and illegal dumping, and

731 for tall grass. Furthermore, dumping is

included in ordinance 729 dedicated to trash

collection set-out violations. One additional

Officer handles improper set-outs for a total of

six Officers currently involved in dumping code

enforcement and two positions remain vacant.

There is no specific individual dedicated to

dumping enforcement within the City of

Cincinnati or Hamilton County.

12

10 days 3 weeks 3 weeks

Initial: C1 Offense ($500)

$1,250 fine + all subsequent citations escalate every 3 weeks unabated + abatement cost fined to property tax code

*Owner-abated and compliance sustained at any point in timeline results in removal of property from PLAP

and declaration of occupancy. Existing fines still due unless decided otherwise in court.

1st subsequent citation: Class D Offense ($750) + property classified as ‘vacant’ + enters PLAP

Action Timeline Following Code Enforcement Inspector Investigation of Citizen Service Request

Figure 9 Litter & Weeds Code Enforcement citation process for illegal dumping as of April, 2015.

Future Efficiency Improvements LWCE is in the process of transitioning to a more efficient, and economically sound system for issuing citations. CAGIS is developing an app for Officers to use on durable tablets in the field which will insert data into a letter and then send it to a portable printer in their trunk. The streamlined digital process will create a history of citations complete with photos, addresses, and tax billing addresses for prosecution stored on the cloud and accessible to the City and County. This system will decrease paper use, CO2 emissions, printing costs, and wasted labor hours. Additionally, LWCE is taking this opportunity to overhaul all citation formatting and language. The system is expected to launch within the next six months.

Currently, all dumping citations through LWCE

are printed in the morning for Officers to bring in

the field. When Officers investigate a service

request and find no violation, the citation is

disposed of at a loss of resources, labor, and

funding. Citations may also require a change to

the citation, requiring Officers to drive back to

the Office, re-print the citation, and drive back to

the site.

Since January 1st of 2012, 233 civil citations

were issued by LWCE for private property

owners with litter on their property that was

presumably dumped there. Of these, 184 were

abated by the property owner or his/her agent,

representing a 79% compliance rate.

As of April 2015 the enforcement process for

dumping on private properties starts with an

initial citation of $500 upon the Officer inspecting

the private property location reported through

the CSR system. All fines issued double if not

paid or a written answer filed within 7 days.

At this point, Code Enforcement Officers return

to the scene and issue a $750 citation if the

property is still in violation. After the second

subsequent citation and Class E fine of $1,250,

properties are declared ‘vacant’ and put into the

Private Lot Abatement Program (PLAP)

operated by DPS in partnership with a non-profit

Keep Cincinnati Beautiful (KCB).

13

.

Keep Cincinnati Beautiful KCB receives about 70% of their annual budget from DPS and thus is a strong partner in dumping prevention and abatement programs. They’ve launched educational campaigns like the infamous, ‘Don’t trash my Nati’, hosted EPA funded tire amnesty events, and coordinate the new abatement effort PLAP. KCB’s deer camera operation led by KCB staff Adam Curry, monitors four chronic dump sites in the city. Each camera set-up costs $300 while decoy cameras cost $40. Decoys are a good technique if funding isn’t available to buy an actual camera. Two court cases are currently in the legal pipeline as a result of this initiative.

Figure 10 Photos taken by Hamilton County Sheriff Jimmy Cox, who supervises the PLAP crew.

As of early April there were 839 referrals to

PLAP. Of those, an estimated 122 were abated

and 189 are scheduled for abatement. Lots may

be cleaned-up by volunteers, Hamilton County

Sheriff work-crews, Community Partners, Lawn

Life, Easter Seal, or DPS staff. Not only does

this program mobilize citizen groups to get

involved in abatement, but also provides job

training for people with disabilities through

Easter Seals. PLAP pays $52,000 a year for

inmates to help with clean-up and some

dumping specific projects. The City spent

$120,000 in 2015 for the PLAP program. In

2016 an additional $165,000 was included in the

city budget and another $138,000 was obtained

from grants for PLAP. This investment into the

economic recovery of Cincinnati helps clean-up

blighted lots, many of which include dumping.

In 2014, KCB used OEPA grant funding to

organize 14 cleanups with hundreds of

volunteers and community service workers.

Over 60 tons of trash and 2,245 illegally dumped

tires were properly disposed of. In order to cover

more ground, DPS is launching a new initiative

within PLAP cleverly named ‘Help-A-Lot’.

This program pays community groups (i.e.

football teams, community councils, etc.) to

clean-up selected lots in the PLAP. Lots may be

severely overgrown and/ or dump sites as

depicted in the photos below. Overgrown

properties are indicators of blight and prime

dumping grounds. Since it takes a long time to

clean-up hundreds of blighted properties,

Officers continue to return to the property and

escalate fines for violations every three weeks

after the second citation.

14

Figure 11 Section pulled from Building Code Enforcement second citation letter.

There are a few important nuances to this

citation process including the ability for property

owners in good standing to petition the city to be

part of an amnesty program. This program

allows owners to receive up to 100% of their

citation back after prompt remediation and

allows renters to receive up to 50% of their fine

reimbursed. This decision was made in

response to frustrated citizens who are victims

of dumping but manage their properties

responsibly overall because they are held

financially responsible if no culprit is found to

charge for the crime of dumping. However, the

different treatment of owners who occupy their

homes and apartment owners created much

frustration from landlords in the City.

Another nuance to the system is how both

Building and Litter & Weed Code Enforcement

Officers are citing the same issue in disparate

ways. Although foreclosed properties are prone

to dumping, homes or lots need only be vacant

to serve as a true magnet for dumping. When

Building Code Enforcement investigates a site

and finds dumping, they issue a citation.

Cincinnati’s Vacant Foreclosed Property

Registration Maintenance Requirements include

Section 1123-9, Maintenance Obligations of

Mortgages. As such, ‘During the period that the

property is registered, the mortgagee is required

to maintain vacant, foreclosed property free of

all outward appearances including keeping the

premises free of debris and litter.

The first citation is $50, subsequent $100, and

then the fee doubles every 7 days. Usually,

Building Code Enforcement deal with buildings

without standard ownership. For example, these

Officers frequently hold banks responsible for

the littering/ dumping fine because of defaulted

ownership. Preservation Companies maintaining

these buildings also commonly assume the

responsibility of lawn care and ordinance

compliance. In fact, approximately 30% of

properties in the city are in corporate home

ownership. These properties are typically in

areas with the highest dumping rates and

poorest communities. Directing citations to these

parties is critical for collection because landlords

are not even allowed back on their property after

foreclosure. If a previous landlord or owner is

cited, they easily appeal this fee in court after

foreclosure. Currently, Litter & Weeds Code

Enforcement may cite a property which turns out

to be in the foreclosure process. Although

Building Code Enforcement has an open access

and frequently updated list of foreclosed building

online (see Resources for link), the Litter

Officers are not currently using this in the field.

15

HAMILTON COUNTY

Hamilton County Public Health’s Division of

Waste Management (DWM) receives complaints

over the phone or agency referrals (i.e. Soil and

Water Conservation District). The complaint is

either handled as a nuisance if mismanagement

of trash/ garbage, or an open dump site if debris

like construction materials or tires. Townships

without trash collection subscription are the

main culprits of dumping. Furthermore, DWM

Officers identified lead, mold, and bed bugs as

other issues commonly present in the same

geographic range as dumping.

Since photo proof of violation is included on

citations, a strong court case is built throughout

the whole process. Also, citations include

intimidating language referencing all relevant

state-level fines which may be issued (see

Figure 12). Properties with dumping have one

month for abatement and nuisance complaints

have one week before escalating to second

notice and a letter from Prosecutor threatening a

court case. Although unabated properties

escalate to the prosecutor, the majority are

owner-abated prior to this step.

Figure 12 Notice of Violation from Hamilton County Public Health Solid Waste Unit. Continued on next page.

16

Cincinnati Police Department Each neighborhood in the City has a designated Officer to contact with questions or concerns. These officers serve as liaisons between communities and the Department. Although more Officers are not required to enforce dumping regulations, Officers must be trained on protocol and regulations. Most Officers have not handled Environmental Crimes. They may not know someone transporting more than 10 tires without a permit is breaking state law. They also must be given reason to believe their actions will lead to convictions.

THE STATE & JURISDICTIONS

At the County-level, the Recycling and Solid

Waste District (HCRSWD) has a state-mandate

to serve as a non-regulatory outreach arm

dedicated to waste reduction programs.

Currently, the HCRSWD’s main role is funding

programs and is not involved with prevention.

For example, in 2014 HCRSWD provided

$20,000 to KCB for tire clean-up events and

received a grant from the Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency (OEPA) for tire amnesty

drop-off days. It should be noted HCRWSWD

doesn’t have jurisdiction in the City of Cincinnati.

On a County-level, tires and construction waste

are major illegal dumping concerns. HCRSWD

helped lead a task force in 2010 to crack down

on tire dumping in Hamilton County which has

since disintegrated. HCRSWD is now

collaborating with major Ohio municipalities in

Fall 2015 to create a state-wide solution to tire

dumping. Since their dedicated team is willing to

collaborate and implement more preventative

measures, they will play a critical role in tackling

dumping across Hamilton County.

Ohio Revised Code (ORC) Chapter 3734 and

Ohio Administrative Code 3745 regulate

dumping on a state level. The OEPA may

pursue administrative and civil enforcement for

noncompliance with tire laws. Criminal

prosecution may ensue for extreme cases.

When the City identifies a dumping culprit,

protocol requires staff to contact the County

Prosecutor’s Office in order to determine the

best way to proceed. Strong collaborative

communication is required between the City and

County since specific processes within this

general framework are handled on a case-by-

case basis.

All dumping felony charges require County

involvement since the Criminal Chief must

review the case to determine if it will go to the

Grand Jury who then determines whether felony

or misdemeanor charges will be pursued. If tires

are involved in the dumping case, state charges

may be issued.

To determine regulatory authority, parties are

asked to contact OEPA, the City Prosecutor’s

Office, or the County Prosecutor’s Office.

Responsibility duplication, jurisdictional

confusion, and disparate prioritization pertaining

to the investigation and prosecution of dumpers

is creating a low risk environment dumpers take

full advantage of. This is not the fault of any

City or County entity, just a reality all entities

need to tackle together.

17

KEY DRIVERS

After providing an overview of the current state

across multi temporal and bureaucratic scales,

this section breaks the dumping stream down for

further analysis. The most commonly reported

dumped items between June 2014 and June

2015 were furniture, tires, construction

materials, and household trash like garbage

bags and clothes. Material characterization of

dumped waste flow allows for strategic

intervention and effective action.

Mattresses and box springs alone comprise

14% of the reported waste stream. And when

mattresses are combined with other items this

percentage rises to 18%. Couches are another

frequently reported object; 9% alone and 15%

when mixed with other items. Combined,

furniture (including sofas), mattresses, and box

springs comprise 36% of the reported dump

stream city-wide.

18

Figure 14 Population decline from half a million in 1960 to about 300,000 today left many buildings vacant.

FURNITURE & PERSONAL BELONGINGS

The category ‘dumpsites’ is used to describe

sites with a wide variety and bulk of materials,

making accurate and clear classification difficult.

Interviews suggest one dump load frequently

normalizes the act and attracts other dumpers

with various materials, which can quickly balloon

a few trash bags into a medium sized dumpsite.

Construction materials (7%) and Tires/ car parts

(8%) may not seem like significant components

of the problem, however, both of these

categories are found at the majority of larger

mixed dumpsites. Household items including

garbage bags, clothes, and toys are 10% of the

materials reported and 17% when combined

with other items. Interestingly, it is unclear if

garbage bags reported contain clothes, yard

waste, food, or construction debris like carpet.

These significant findings require further

analysis into key drivers and potential solutions.

Since over one third of dumped materials

reported were classified as furniture or other

household belongings, this category must be

addressed. Specifically, couches and

mattresses seem to be ‘poster children’ for

dumping because most residents have seen

either or both illegally discarded. Since these

items are large and many landlords, renters, and

(to a lesser extent) home owners may be unsure

how to properly dispose of them or are unwilling

to pay the fee to do so if ineligible for free DPS

bulk pick-up. When some residents move or

replace furniture, the old items are commonly

tossed in an alley, curb, or random dumpster.

There are many drivers behind this trend

including foreclosure, evictions, landlord

practices, frequent movers, and bed bugs.

Foreclosure and Vacancy

Vacant properties generated from decades of

out-migration and the mortgage crisis create

convenient low risk places for people to throw

their trash without paying disposal fees.

As shown in the following map, there are

numerous foreclosed lots across the City

with higher concentration in neighborhoods

of high reported or suspected dumping.

Figure 13 Photo depicts a mixed dumpsite.

19

Figu

re 1

5 M

ap d

epic

ts t

he

nu

mb

er o

f fo

recl

osu

res

and

th

e n

um

be

r o

f ill

egal

du

mp

ing

serv

ice

req

ue

sts

fro

m 2

01

4-2

01

5.

Fore

clo

sure

s an

d Il

lega

l Du

mp

ing

Serv

ice

Re

qu

est

s 2

01

4-2

01

5

20

Landlords and Multi-Family Housing

Figure 16 The exits from alley parking are frequently blocked by furniture dumping in some neighborhoods. Bottom photo from KCB.

Landlords are uniquely impacted by dumping

because people view their dumpsters as easy

places to unload stuff so they don’t have to pay

disposal fees. These free loaders transition the

burden to property owners who, if over 4 units,

must pay a private hauler for trash and bulk

pick-up plus a 10% franchise fee to dispose of

the items. Disposal fees for waste generated on

site and dumped materials are then distributed

through increased rent. Some landlords have

installed cameras to catch those who pull up

and dump. Landlords feel these leads are not

followed up on by enforcement officials when

reported, even when everything is caught on

camera including a license plate. Steps such as

this were implemented after dumping on

apartment complex dumpsters increased

substantially right after the one cart policy was

deployed despite this policy not being heavily

enforced.

Furniture from off-site is the most commonly

dumped item on these properties or in and

around their dumpsters. Responsible landlords

schedule a bulk-pick up at substantial cost to

them, through private haulers for apartments

with more than 4 units. For example, Rumpke

charges an estimated $95 for removing one

couch which must be wrapped in plastic. Some

landlords receive citations from LWCE while

waiting for Rumpke to come after scheduling.

Then, they fight these charges in court. This

whole cycle creates a substantial burden on

responsible property owners and is an inefficient

use of LWCE Officers’ time. Since the County

Auditor lists contact information for all registered

rental properties online, landlords would like

LWCE to call them (if in good standing) when

inspecting their property instead of writing a

ticket. This way, landlords will be informed of the

issue and be granted an opportunity to promptly

address it without being punished. This would

save both landlords and LWCE Officers time

and frustration frequently spent debating the

charges in court later.

21

Landlords are confused about which properties

are offered City services and don’t understand

why all residents, no matter the size of their

building, ‘aren’t treated equally’. They suggest a

privatization or transition to only DPS service in

the City, instead of a piece-meal approach.

Exploitative and irresponsible landlord practices

are anomalies in the industry, but greatly impact

dumping in the City. Some landlords claim they

are unable to control what tenants do with their

waste on their property or beyond. Education

about proper disposal of items, prices, and

penalties of improper disposal are seriously

lacking. That being said, enforcement on actual

chronic offenders (not those who are victims of

dumping but abate within a reasonable time)

must be increased to help turn knowledge into

action. Landlords receive increasing fines and a

chronic offender status for not cutting their

grass, and some in the industry suggest a

similar approach to chronic improper waste

management in apartments.

Evictions

Contrary to popular belief, neither the CPD or

sheriff’s department have authority over

evictions. The Hamilton County Clerk of

Municipal Courts oversees eviction paperwork

and the physical removal of tenants.

Interestingly, community members suggest most

dumping around apartments happens on the

weekend which would support the assumption

apartment dumping isn’t solely due to evictions.

Every work day the Municipal Courts fax a copy

of evictions from 2 days ago to the Call Center.

The delay ensures Officers don’t check up on

the lot within the period of time landlords have to

clean-up the property (48 hours).

If a LWCE Officer receives a complaint which

they suspect may be linked to an eviction, they

check the CSR system for any indication of a

confirmed eviction. If a complaint is filed against

a property for illegal dumping or litter and an

eviction is confirmed more than 48 hours prior,

then the LWCE Officers will issue a citation.

Figure 17 Photo from KCB shows mattresses dumped in an alleyway.

22

Resident has at least 24 hours to pick-up belongings

after eviction is complete. Landlords have 48 hours

from eviction completion to properly dispose of all

uncollected items in order to avoid a ‘failure to maintain

private property free of litter’ citation.

Owner must sign complaint and appear

in Court or be represented by Attorney. If

no defense, Court grants writ of

restitution and usually 7 days to vacate,

although fewer days may be given.

Renter breaches contract

3 day notice

(excluding holidays and weekends)

Landlord files eviction complaint for

forcible entry & detainer with County

Clerks. Court date scheduled 18-21

days after processing.

Municipal Court Bailiff’s Office contacted

by landlord to arrange set-out with

Deputy Bailiff.

Deputy Bailiff meets landlord on

property on eviction day to remove

tenant if necessary as well as

witnessing the change of locks,

proper disposal of hazardous waste,

and inventory of goods.

Landlord physically moves

tenant stuff from inside of unit

to outside. Usually landlords

contract this service and items

are brought to curb.

During this time

citizens frequently

collect all their items

from the home they

intend on keeping.

Pickers commonly

dig into belongings,

creating a mess

which may span

multiple lots.

Landlord properly donates

items or discards at

Rumpke. Landlord has no

right to keep belongings.

Landlord illegally dumps items.

The Eviction Process

23

N/A0

5

10

15

20

25

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Year

% Reporting Problems with Bed Bugs in Home

Figure 18 Graph depicts data collected in 2009, 2010, and 2012 by the Greater Cincinnati Survey conducted by UC. Trend line shows experiential data from stakeholders involved in bed bug battle.

Bed Bugs

Bed bugs do not ingest chemicals since they

have piercing/ sucking mouthparts, only feed on

blood, and can survive several weeks without

feeding. The Cincinnati Health Department

estimates 70% of these nocturnal bugs are in

sleeping and relaxing areas (i.e. couch,

armchair). They are excellent hitch hikers and

are easily spread in multi-unit buildings. Many

chemical and non-chemical treatments exist for

treating this problem, however, some poor

communities cannot afford these treatments or

are uneducated about proper protocol.

For example, when bed bugs first became a

problem in Cincinnati, individuals were not sure

what to do so they sprayed alcohol in their

homes to try to kill the bugs. This treatment kills

on contact without residual effect but it also

poses a serious safety concern because

smoking and other open flames indoors could

ignite the whole house. Also, heat is frequently a

good option for individual items due to the

service of containerized heat treatments.

However, some residents use the heat

treatment for their entire home and may forget to

remove plastic items, electronics, and other

heat-sensitive objects. Due to this confusion and

horror stories of failed treatment, many residents

opted for illegal dumping of their items during

the beginning years of this break-out.

The City will pick up contaminated items during

a scheduled bulk-pick up for free, however,

many residents either didn’t know this or didn’t

care during the bed bug outbreak. Dumping of

furniture, mattresses, and other items with

crevices increased. Many residents tossed their

belongings by dumpsters, vacant lots, or on the

curbside. Trash pickers would then frequently

pick-up these items and take them home,

especially those items wrapped in plastic.

Contaminated items were required to be

wrapped in plastic before the City purchased a

lightening loader for bulk items, however, this

ironically made items even more desirable since

they were preserved from the elements.

Over time as the City reacted, this outbreak

evolved from panic where people threw

everything out when they saw one bed bug, to a

more informed and rational response. This shift

was partly due to increase education, but also a

new type of pesticide developed which lasts up

to 6 months in the home, enabling residual kill

options. Proper integrated pest management

requires inspection, unit prep for treatment,

treatment, and follow-up.

24

This process requires tenant cooperation and

can range widely in cost. If a landlord hires a

pesticide operator to remove bed bugs from

their building or a unit and the resident doesn’t

do due diligence in the abating the problem, a

third party complaint may be filed to evict the

resident. Processes are now in place to address

bed bugs and they are less of a concern in 2015

than five years ago. However, miseducation

about the proper way to react is still leading to

dumping and bed bug spread. Saran wrap is no

longer required for disposing of items and simply

spray painting an ‘X’ on mattresses which are

contaminated is not enough to deter pickers.

The best option for residents is to destroy

contaminated items by slashing/ cutting

materials and/or breaking legs off chairs to

render them undesirable. Then, these items

must be requested for pick-up by the City if

under 5 units, properly disposed of by tenants,

or responsibly discarded by landlords. The bed

bug driver of dumping provides an interesting

example of how seemingly unrelated trends are

deeply tied. Hopefully now it is clear how bed

bug prevention and treatment programs are also

dumping prevention strategies.

Figure 19 Photo on top shows dumper caught on KCB's deer cam and photo on bottom shows dumped furniture in a forested area (also from KCB).

25

Figure 20 Photo shows alley prone to illegal dumping of a mixture of materials including tires and construction debris.

TIRES

Ohio Revised Code prohibits dumping whole or

shredded tires. As explained on the OEPA

website, offenders may be fined $10,000 to

$25,000, and be sentenced to 2-4 years in

prison even if in violation with one tire. Used/

scrap tire transporters must be licensed and

registered by State of Ohio EPA as a

Transporter and must have a written manifest

signed by customer and a copy of their license

with them for every tire transported. All

unregistered transporters may not haul more

than 10 tires at any time. Currently, this law is

not stringently enforced in the City.

Residents can recycle their scrap tires with

Rumpke ($3/ tire), Tire Discounters, and

Walmart Tire & Lube for a fee. Retail stores and

other tire generators who hire licensed must

sign and keep the scrap tire form when used

tires are picked up. This form includes the

number of tires picked up from where and the

destination. Some tires scrappers steal tires with

the intention of selling them to small stores and

then dump the tires of poor quality which were

rejected. The majority of scrappers are not in

compliance with OEPA ordinances.

The Facts Cincinnati spends approximately $150,000

per year on fees and staff time for tire

recycling.

In 2014, Hamilton County Public Health and

Cincinnati Health Department conducted a

combined 176 inspections of open dumps or

nuisance cases where scrap tires were

involved.

Hamilton County Recycling & Solid Waste

District gave $20,000 to KCB for tire

collection programs.

In 2014 HCRSWD was awarded an Ohio EPA

Scrap Tire Amnesty grant so more events were

held and tires collected. The EPA tracks how

many tires are collected and provides money

back to the city. In 2014, this program recycled

70 tons (7,001 tires). The program has seen no

reduction in tires collected over last decade.

OEPA amnesty grants for drop-off days accept a

minimum of 100 and maximum of 2,000 tires.

However, these events usually collected 50-75

tires. Drop-offs may help reduce illegal dumping,

they are not necessarily a long-term solution.

State Law

ORC 3734.83 (C) prohibits companies to

sell tires to unregistered tire transporters.

ORC 3734.99 outlaws the unregistered

transportation, open burning, and open

dumping of tires. Violation is a felony

with a fine of $10,000 to $25,000, and/ or

imprisonment for 2 to 4 years.

26

Dumped tires not only pose as an eye

sore, but an environmental health

hazard. Tires serve as breeding

grounds for vermin and mosquitos.

Furthermore, tires pollute the

watershed and contaminate land.

Both photos are from KCB.

27

DUMPED HOUSEHOLD TRASH

Figure 21 Graph depicts number of illegal dumping service requests (excluding duplicates) from FY 2006 to 2015.

As Call Center hours decreased, commercial pick-up ended, and policies changed requiring citizens to use only one

trash cart and schedule bulk item collection over the phone, dumping requests increased. Requests decreased in

2015 once citizens were able to utilize more than one cart and the Friday Blitz program began. Is this correlation

simply coincidence?

5479 63

98 93

246

464

537

892

682

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of Service Requests for Illegal Dumping

A series of trash policy changes directly

impacted dumping trends in the last decade (as

shown in Figure 19). In the early 1990s,

Cincinnati shifted from picking up all trash to

only residential, specifically 4 units or less.

Landlords of buildings with more than 4 units are

required to hire a commercial hauler, however,

this law was not strictly enforced until 2010. On

the contrary, recycling services are offered to all

entities, commercial and residential within city

limits. DPS purchased a lightning loader in

response to the bed bug outbreak starting

around 2007 as well as a high number of worker

injuries handling items. In 2013 DPS

implemented a new policy requiring each citizen

to utilize one City-issued 65 gallon trash can.

This policy led to dumping in apartment

dumpsters, leading many landlords to install

cameras. As a result, the number of calls

pertaining to dumping frustration from business

and private property owners increased

dramatically. Despite citizen frustration, Council

denied a motion to dismiss citations for dumping

on private property if abated in 10 days. 2014

the City started offering citizens the option to

pick-up one more cart per unit for free in hopes

of decreasing this problem and frustration from

the community. Household trash including

garbage bags, broken toys, clothing, etc. may

be placed in the garbage bins if citizens choose

not to divert them through other entities

including charities and recycling options.

28

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

Many small time ‘fly-by-night’ handymen dump

their waste instead of paying tipping fees.

Economically speaking, the very low risk of

getting caught dumping does not outweigh the

cost savings of at least $35 or more at Rumpke

for these individuals. To drop off a load of

construction waste at Rumpke landfill it costs a

minimum of $35 for 3 cubic yards or less and

$12 a yard extra beyond that.

For waste streams like construction material,

many law abiding citizens remodeling their

homes and working on projects may be

confused on how to dispose properly.

Construction materials are not accepted in the

City trash bins and citizens are asked to bring

their materials to Rumpke or another location

listed in Resources at end of document. One

new option is Waste Management’s (WM)

Bagster service which allows citizens to

purchase a large ‘bag’ online or at large home

improvement stores like Home Depot, fill it with

up to 3,300 lbs/ 3 cubic yards of construction

debris, and then schedule a curbside pick-up

through WM. The first bag is $99 and all

additional bags are $79. This cost is

substantially higher than landfill options locally,

however, they offer convenient curbside pick-up.

For more details please visit their website. Since

there are so many options for disposal of

construction waste already available to citizens,

the City likely will focus on increasing knowledge

of these options instead of providing an

additional service.

Figure 22 Photo from KCB shows dumped tiles along with other construction materials and plastic bags of items located in a wooded area.

29

CRIME CORRELATION

Figure 23 This vacant building is a hotspot for crime including prostitution and also provides an isolated dumpsite for a wide variety of items including tires.

Illegal dumping is most common in

neighborhoods already struggling with crime,

violence, and poor health. Low socioeconomic

status may cause conditions which promote

these factors including illegal dumping. This

correlation has social injustice implications due

to the higher prevalence of dumping in already

disadvantaged neighborhoods. Within Districts

1,2,4, and 5 crime and dumping seem to cluster

more than District 3, which has dumping in more

isolated locations. Currently, dump sites are not

intentionally integrated into police routes. Many

Officers find it difficult to prioritize the issue due

to the uncharacteristically high levels of violent

crime experienced in the City over the last year.

However, crime and dumping are married issues

and symptoms of the same disease- decreased

opportunity and pride. In Figure 24, areas

without reported crime (pink dots) rarely include

reported dumping (red dots). A potential area of

investigation would be to explore the areas of

high crime without reported dumping to

determine if these areas are free of the problem

or are simply not reporting it. For example, West

End has a high crime rate and high dumping

based on experiential observations but

experiences low reporting.

30

Figu

re 2

4 M

ap il

lust

rate

s se

lect

cri

me

dat

a (v

and

alis

m, t

hef

t, r

ob

ber

y, f

rau

d, b

urg

lary

, au

to t

hef

t) a

nd

ille

gal d

um

pin

g se

rvic

e re

qu

ests

fo

r FY

2

014

-201

5.

Cin

cin

nat

i Cri

me

an

d Il

lega

l Du

mp

ing

Serv

ice

Re

qu

est

s 2

01

4-2

015

31

OHIO BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

prioritize environmental crimes and attend

training to become subject matter experts.

Police Officers know they can hand over cases

to County Prosecutors who are involved during

the whole life cycle of a case. Although the

ECTF experienced substantial turnover since its

inception, the program has grown stronger.

ECTF will be looking to expand its collaboration

with others in the future. This could include

partnerships with other municipalities, state

agencies, and police departments.

At the time of the creation of the ECTF, in 1992,

there were 42 active dumpsites in Franklin

County. Within just a few years, those 42 sites

had been eliminated. The ECTF approach of

thorough investigation and prosecution forced

dumpers to find smaller less convenient sites

with a much higher risk of getting caught.

New sites are recognized through monitoring

and reporting. All complaints are investigated.

Cases that are prosecuted are usually cleaned

up and eliminated within weeks. When dump

sites or dumpers are spotted, citizens are asked

to report using the ECTF’s website

(http://www.itsacrime.org/) or by phone at (614)

871-5322. This website also includes an easy-

to-use, simple, and highly visual list of where to

take different items in the County for disposal

including batteries, tires, and hazardous waste.

Yard waste, recycling, and household

hazardous waste disposal are offered without

direct charge for citizens of the County by

SWACO.

Since the USEPA just began an in-depth study

on how Midwestern cities handle illegal dumping,

this section only focuses on Columbus, Dayton,

and Cleveland area programs briefly.

Franklin County (Central Ohio)

Founded in 1992, the Environmental Crimes

Task Force (ECTF) of Central Ohio is funded by

The Solid Waste Authority of Central Ohio

(SWACO) at about $500,000 a year and

operated in partnership with the City of

Columbus, Franklin County Sheriff’s Department,

Franklin County Public Health, and the Franklin

County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.

The main ECTF representatives include six

individuals: two Franklin County Sheriff Deputies,

an Assistant Franklin County Prosecuting

Attorney, one part-time Franklin county Public

Health Inspector, one part-time county Public

Health Administrator, and one City of Columbus

Solid Waste Inspector. Four of the six

representatives investigate and the two deputies

are divided geographically to make arrests. The

Task Force has a scheduled monthly meeting

and weekly check-in, but also meet as needed.

One of the most beneficial ways members check

in with each other is at their shared work space.

Open collaborative communication channels

ensure all players are informed about proper

protocol and can work to solve problems as they

arise or prevent them in the first place. Another

important element of the program is partially

funding Prosecutor and Inspector positions from

the ECTF fund. This allows personnel to

32

Montgomery County (Dayton)

created a three prong approach for addressing

them: enforcement, education, and action.

Efforts are funded through district landfill tipping

(disposal) fees, a funding mechanism enabled

by House Bill 592 in 1988.

The Sheriff’s Department hired a Deputy Sheriff

dedicated to dumping who then collaborated

with Police Chiefs to train Police Departments

during their roll-call on how to identify and

handle illegal transporters of tires and more

dumping-related crimes. This Sheriff also built

strong cases for the courts while educating

prosecutors and judges on the importance of

successful prosecution. Furthermore, they

increased education and outreach through Keep

Montgomery County Beautiful.

As of May, 2015 over 90 illegal dump-sites have

been cleaned up by convicted dumpers ordered

to do so as part of their sentence. Felonious

dumpers may receive up to four years in prison

and $25,000 in fines. In one case, someone

hauling more than ten tires was required to pay

$10,000 in penalties, fines, and court costs.

Since 2013, Montgomery County successfully

made over 60 convictions for dumping, most of

which were related to tires. Also, Montgomery

County residents may also dispose of 10 tires a

year at the facility.

About three years ago Montgomery County

identified the dumping of tires as a serious

problem which spurred the creation of an

Environmental Crimes Task Force modeled off

Franklin County’s program. Their team received

training from the Franklin County Task Force

which pioneered this movement in Ohio with

cases like successfully sentencing a repeat

scrap tire transporter to seven years jail time.

Montgomery’s Task Force is comprised of the

County Sheriff’s Dept. and Montgomery SWMD

as well as representatives from the EPA, Health

Department, and jurisdictions with serious

dumping problems.

This Task Force identified a lack of education

within the government and public as a key driver

of the problem. Citizens were confused on

where to bring their waste materials,

misinformed about how much disposal costs,

and uninformed about punishment severity.

Public employees within Police Departments,

the Legal system, and more were not fully aware

of the depth of this problem and their role in

stopping it. Concerns about penalizing those

without funds to dispose of their waste properly

in the first place and sending more citizens to jail

worried Prosecutors and thus environmental

crimes were historically not prioritized. After the

Task Force identified these concerns, they

33

Cuyahoga County (Cleveland)

Figure 25 Large suspected illegal dump site identified by Cleveland’s task force and covered by Ron Regan at local Cleveland ABC news station.

Since the Task Force cracked down on tires, the

problem has shifted to construction debris and

household goods, usually dumped by landlords

after evictions. Police Officers found most

people pulled over for illegally transporting or

dumping have a criminal record and many have

warrants out for their arrest already.

Installing deer cameras at dumping hotspots

helped increase monitoring. Utilizing inmate

labor for clean-up assistance also helped pump

up coverage of this Task Force. One of the most

important strategies was launching a multi-

media communication and education strategy.

As part of this communication strategy, the team

used Billboards, door hangers, and flyers. In

order to inform landlords about proper practices

during eviction, the Task Force mailed handouts

to their tax addresses. They also implemented

creative solutions like adding disposal options/

costs on MRF receipts and partnering with the

local baseball team, the Dayton Dragons for

clean-ups. Engaging citizens through classroom

and community group visits also helped reach a

wide range of citizens. Lastly, partnerships with

news stations help get more coverage on

dumping. Stories usually emphasize

punishments as well as before/ after photos.

Dumping was also identified as a threat to

community health and quality of life in Cleveland

within the last few years. Cleveland police

moved dumping from a priority 4 to priority 2,

one level below a man with a gun. They

implemented a program encouraging those who

see dumpers in action to report details about the

vehicle, perpetrator, location, and time to the

number 664-DUMP (3867).

Reporters are rewarded with an amount equal to

half of the fine which is collected by the City if

their report is used to identify and convict a

perpetrator. A misdemeanor under Cleveland

Municipal Code may result in a maximum

penalty of six months in jail and a fine no more

than $1,000, however, felonies result in a

$25,000 fine and four years in prison. In 1997

the illegal dumping fine was only $100.

34

STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS

Figure 26 Chronic dumpsite photo captured by KCB.

Blight remediation of which illegal dumping is

one component, is not just about minimizing

threats, but also about enhancing and protecting

Cincinnati’s many assets. Solutions suggested

in the following chart are a collection of

recommendations from a wealth of

conversations with stakeholders from many

walks of life. Collaboration between

municipalities, departments, industry groups,

non-profits, communities, media, and more will

be required to start abating the dumping issue.

After reading this report, the magnitude of this

problem should be apparent and stakeholders

will have new data to share with key leaders.

The main categories outlined by stakeholders

are Partnerships (internal and external to public

sector), Education/ Outreach, Process/ Policy

Improvement, Enforcement/ Prosecution, and

Economics. Within the category of external

partnerships, special emphasis should be given

to developing collaborative relationships with

landlords in problem areas. The creation of an

Environmental Crimes Task Force would reduce

confusion for citizens and public employees

which is partially produced by split jurisdiction on

dumping between the City and County. As

proven by other major municipalities in Ohio,

coordinated, efficient, and effective action will

also require agenda setting prioritization of the

issue from City, County, and community leaders.

Furthermore, developing a separate funding

source for Environmental Crime investigation

and prosecution is critical for environmental

crimes to survive case load triage.

Furthermore, citizens must be engaged in the

issue and begin to take ownership of their

communities and the problems they face. These

trends will reverse the downward cyclical pattern

of blight into an upward pattern of pride.

Community engagement is key to minimizing

dumping, crime, and blight while increasing

connectivity to each other and their streets.

Together, the entire County can transition from a

reactive system lacking ‘teeth’ to a proactive

approach strengthening the entire region’s

economic, social, and ecological vitality. A

holistic approach is required, acting on just one

or two of these ideas will have a minimal impact.

35

Solutions Proposed by Stakeholders * = more details after chart

Partnerships

Internal:

Problem Solution Potential Barriers

Improper disposal of

bed bug

contamination leads

to further spread and

dumping

Partner with Health Department to educate on proper

disposal of contaminated items. Saran wrap not

required but must destroy contaminated items (i.e.

slash couch/ mattress, break legs off char).

Landlords must be on

board

People may not act

rationally during actual or

suspected outbreak

External:

Lacking clean-up

personnel

Expand PLAP program. Staff required to organize

volunteers

Quality items are

dumped or

scheduled for bulk

pick-up and sent to

landfill

Partner with Goodwill Industries, Habitat’s ReStore, and

other charitable organization to divert these materials. *

Requires prioritization and

collaboration from

University administrators

Landlord relations

strained

Strengthen partnerships with landlord organizations. Landlords may be unwilling

Education & Outreach *

Problem Solution Potential Barriers

Suboptimal youth

engagement on

illegal dumping

Partner with schools and youth programs for increased

education on litter through KCB. Recruit youth groups

for PLAP program so they understand the problem and

that they can be part of the solution. Consider sending

in NOD personnel (i.e. Jude Johnson) for programming.

Sending in DPS

employees may be difficult

due to understaffing

Funding limitations

Reporting options

confusion

Develop communication strategy for increasing

awareness about reporting options (internet, phone,

app) through a myriad of channels. *

Funding limitations

No communication team

for DPS

Confusion as to

options for proper

disposal

Develop communication strategy for educating about

disposal options (internet, phone, app) through a

myriad of channels. *

May be difficult to

effectively reach and

impact dumpers

36

Educate landlords

about disposal

options and

punishments for

dumping

Email/ Mail handouts to registered landlords and spread

information through industry groups detailing how to

dispose of items in general and after evictions. Clarify

the responsibilities of the City and property owners for

complexes with less than and more than 5 units.

No communication team

for DPS

Funding

May not impact select few

in violation

Many tire scrappers

transport, buy, and

sell tires illegally

Send informational letters to small businesses selling

tires in the City to ensure they understand protocol and

are aware they may be held responsible for selling to

an unlicensed transporter.

May prove ineffective

without increased

enforcement

Process & Policy Improvement

Problem Solution Potential Barriers

Citation isn’t

educational tool

Change citation to include information about alternative

options for responsible disposal and the maximum

penalties (at the state-level) for dumping. Citation

should also be revised to ensure clarity.

Dumpers may not use

information

Space on citation limited

25% of CSR calls

relate to scheduling

bulk-item pick-up

which blocks phone

lines, increases drop

rate

Work with CAGIS to create bulk pick up scheduling

options through internet and GPS- enabled app.

Consider adding information about how they can

donate to Goodwill, ReStore, etc. on this request just in

case resident has usable item.

Developing efficient

technical capability may

prove challenging and

time-intensive

Call Center intake

for dumping/ litter

reporting produces

poor quality data

Update CSR intake system for Call Center to reflect

changes to App pertaining to the addition of dumping

and litter multiple choice reporting options.

Logistics

Multiple definitions

for dumping and

littering lead to

confusion and

inefficiency

Departments should collaboratively create one

definition so everyone is ‘speaking the same language’.

Definition should be developed by Task Force.

Each Department has logic

behind their definition

Changes may impact work

flow

Tenants and

landlords of

apartment buildings

with over 4 units and

are not all paying to

dispose of waste

properly.

Expand bulk pick-up and trash collections services to

apartments with over 4 units for a fee or go to Council

about setting aside money in the budget to offer this

service.

Those already dumping

illegally won’t pay

Increased cost and service

burden on DPS

37

Easy access to

dumping sites.

Create protocol for blocking sites. Fence/ barricade

abandoned lots, unused alleys, vacant structures, and

other high dump sites after clean-up.

Funding/ staff

Property rights

Continue to update

DPS reporting

options via the app,

website, and phone.

Clarify differences between litter and dumping for users

reporting issues through the CSR system.

Create intake questions which accurately clarify if issue

is dumping or failure to maintain property free of litter.

Personnel

Wrong classification

of public/ private

land during reporting

leads to decreased

abatement

efficiency.

Program app to suggest to citizens whether their

address (GPS identified or typed in) is on private or

public property.

Logistics

Evictions sent to

DPS every morning

but little follow-

through from DPS.

Streamline eviction reporting process from County

Municipal Courts to DPS on new app LWCE is

developing so Officers have eviction list integrated into

route to check up on.

Logistics

Enforcement & Prosecution

Problem Solution Potential Barriers

Weak

communication

channels between

bureaucratic levels.

Create collaborative Task Force which includes a two

prong approach. OEPA, City, and County staff directly

involved in investigating, prosecuting, and abating

dumping will serve as the right arm. The left arm will

focus on community outreach/ education and include

staff from City and County government, community

organizations, and the private sector. Shared

workspace and a separate funding source are critical.

Training offered to Cincinnati/ Hamilton County by

Franklin County and Montgomery County Task Forces.

Funding

Staffing

CPD not trained on

dumping protocol,

citations, and value.

Need training for PD developed collaboratively with

CPD, DPS, KCB, and more. Training should be

delivered from internal parties. However, training is

ineffective without prosecution prioritization.

Insufficient inclusion of

CPD in development of

training may decrease buy-

in and Officer prioritization

CPD reactive and

low intel on

dumping.

Provide dumping hotspot data based on SRs to DPS

Districts every 6 months in order for CPD to be

proactive on issue.

Staff time

Prioritization

38

LWCE Officers send

citation fine to wrong

parties.

Integrate LWCE system with registered vacant/

foreclosed data base including responsible party

(service provider, bank, etc.) for the property in which

the citation should be sent.

Logistics

No Dumping

focused law

enforcement

personnel.

Create Sheriff, Police Office, or Code Enforcement

position dedicated to dumping investigations. Salary

should be funded in part or totally from Environmental

Crimes funding pool in order to ensure prioritization.

Funding

Prioritization

Lack of ‘example’

cases successfully

prosecuted.

Share process flow for legal proceedings with all

relevant stakeholders.

Prioritization by County and City leadership.

Increased prosecution may

require separate funding

source

High Drop Rates at

Call Center.

Increase digitalization of CSR process and 411

implementation.

Logistics

Too few cameras in

place to monitor

chronic dumpsites.

Grow KCB’s illegal dumping monitoring program.

Consider investing in solar-powered cameras capable

of sending photos over the cloud. Ask other

departments like CPD if they have unused/ unwatched

cameras which can be utilized to monitor dumping.

Funding

CPD does not

prioritize dumping.

Increase CPD priority level for dumping related crimes. Increase in crime leads to

other priorities

No intervention at

chronic dump sites.

Add mirrors and/ or signs to areas commonly dumped

on with message, ‘Smile, you are being reported! Take

it to the landfill or get fined $2,000. *

Funding

Sign making protocol

Economics

Problem Solution Potential Barriers

Disposal costs of

tires lead to dumping

and the EPA’s tire

cost structure is

ineffective.

Improve existing scrap tire fee system. Since the cost

discourages some residents and tire scrappers from

properly recycling tires, collect the cost of recycling at

the point of purchase. Increase purchase fee to $4 or

more. (Currently, residents must pay an OEPA fee of $1

per tire with new purchase and disposal costs $2 and

$3 per tire.)

Holistic solution will require

time and organizational

capacity building

Changing policy at the

state-level may be out of

scope

Chronic offender

landlords are not

pressured to stop.

Increase fines and declaration of chronic offender

status to landlords. Also promote responsible owner

amnesty program which allows for rebate of abatement

Hard to discern good from

irresponsible landlords

39

costs. Increase rebate from 50 to 100% for non-owner

occupied properties. Requires Council

amendment

Low-income

population may not

have funds to pay

for proper disposal.

Offer a discount for each truck load dropped off by a

low income resident, $10 instead of $20 and/ or 1 free

drop-off per year per person. Partner with Social

Service Agencies.

Private haulers may not

want to provide discount

Funding

Little circular

economy innovation

in City.

Encourage innovation in re-use/ recycling sector with

circular economy ideas through partnerships with

Universities and other entities. Example: Detroit Treads

are sandals made from illegally dumped tires.

Funding

Other

Problem Solution Potential Barriers

NOD lacking

personnel required

for highly successful

Blitz events.

Continue Friday Blitz program and increase staffing at

NOD for enhanced beautification.

Funding

Additional Services:

Just Add More Dumpsters, Right? DPS considered offering more dumpsters as a

partial solution to this problem of dumping.

Different details were discussed including the

need for constant staffing, access, labor

requirements, hazardous waste contamination,

costs, and more. Also, the OEPA limits year-

round non-transfer station sites to one 40 yard

roll—off. At this time, adding more dumpsters

beyond the Blitz program should not be

prioritized due to these concerns.

Additional services may need to be offered in

order to give people the ability to get rid of their

stuff. However, the concern still remains that

individuals would not use these services if

dumping laws are not enforced and added

disposal options are not free and convenient.

Furthermore, DPS plans to explore the costs

and benefits associated with offering a waste

removal service for landlords which may help

prevent dumping associated with evictions.

Another suggestion separate or married to the

prior, is to start a 24/7 eviction hotline for

landlords about to evict their tenants.

40

Citizen Communication Strategy:

Furthermore, building relationships with local

news anchors now will help get coverage for

high profile cases as enforcement continues.

News stories on PLAP, the Blitz, and other

innovative programs that City is implementing

could also help citizens realize how large the

problem is, how much is costs, and inspire them

to take action in their community. Offering press

releases to news sources would also help

increase coverage.

All citizen-focused communication efforts should

always include an educational component about

what citizens can do about the problem and be

directed at prioritized goals. Objectives of

communication are to help citizens

understand…1) why illegal dumping is a

problem and how much it costs to clean-up, 2)

their options and costs for disposal, 3)Potential

penalties for dumping, 4) their reporting options.

Each of these focuses will be directed at a

certain audience. For example, the highlight of

engagement with youth should not be the

penalties of dumping. On the contrary, a

billboard located in a commonly dumped area

would reach those who may not go to

community meetings or follow DPS on twitter.

DPS needs a comprehensive communication

strategy to address dumping. Partnerships with

community organizations and councils, social

organizations, and religious organizations are

key for effectively launching this campaign.

Reaching out to citizens and entities within

hotspots of dumping should be prioritized since

dumping is not an issue in many neighborhoods.

Also, outreach focused in the warmer months

would be the most efficient use of resources due

to higher rates of dumping. A myriad of methods

should be used in order to reach those out of

mainstream society including:

o Billboards

o Radio

o Social media

o Churches

o Barbershops

o MRF receipts

o Door-to-door

o CDCs

o Kroger

o Schools

o Youth Programs

o Community Councils

o TV/ Youtube commercials

o Busses and bus stops

Student Engagement In order to inject new creativity and cut costs

associated with a communication campaign,

partnering with universities in the City should be

considered. Creating a competition for students

to develop the best campaign would be a great

learning opportunity for them and help reduce

the burden on DPS. Building a relationship with

news agencies in the City would also help

increase knowledge of this problem,

punishments, and solutions.

Figure 27 ‘Plant Pride, Not Litter’ was Ohio’s 2001 litter prevention and clean-up campaign.

41

The Power of Partnerships:

Dumpsite Signs:

NO

DUMPING ALLOWED

IF YOU ARE DUMPING ILLEGALLY,

SMILE FOR THE CAMERA!

SECURITY NOTICE IF YOU ARE

DUMPING ILLEGALLY,

SMILE FOR THE CAMERA.

You may be charged with $25,000 and up to

4 years in jail for dumping.

Or, you can drive to Rumpke landfill and pay

a min. of $35 per truck load.

Some citizens have posted their own creative

signs to keep dumpers away from chronic

dumpsites in their community. Although this sign

is sometimes effective with or without the

presence of a camera, a more effective

intervention should also include additional

information about potential punishments.

Also, substituting an attached mirror in the same

location of the smiley face on the sign may

prove an effective psychological tool to

discourage dumpers. When potential criminals

see themselves committing an illegal act they

are less likely to go forward with it.

least effective to most effective

Many non-profits focused on community and

economic development are interested in

collaborating with the City to increase citizen

engagement. For example, Price Hill Will (PHW)

is a non-profit with the mission of revitalizing

their neighborhood including E, W, and Lower

Price Hill. Their leadership is concerned illegal

dumping decreased investment and deters

residents from moving to the neighborhood. In

response, PHW helps organize clean-ups and

encourages citizens to report violations through

the City App. When approached about

collaborating on a communication strategy,

they were eager to offer assistance and willing

to facilitate discussion with three Community

Councils of Price Hill. Since Price Hill

communities experience above average

dumping by both reported and experiential data,

this partnership is key to addressing dumping.

The exciting news is that PHW is just one

example of many non-profits interested in

working with the City and citizens to create

cleaner, safer, more thriving streets. Forming

strong partnerships with well-established and

respected community organizations is a key

component to helping increase citizen pride and

ownership of their neighborhood.

42

University Dumping-focused Solutions:

DPS also took note of this problem and

implemented a solution during the 2014-2015

school year. During the move-out period of late

April to early May and move-in period of mid-

August, DPS worked with local landlords to offer

free dumpsters for students. Landlords directed

students to these dumpsters, thus saving them

money and effort while decreasing dumping and

confusion for students. The first run of this

program was successful and DPS plans to

continue. Therefore, the groundwork for further

collaboration has been established.

There are ten colleges and universities within

the borders of Cincinnati the largest of which is

the University of Cincinnati (UC). University-

affiliated dumping is explored in this section

through a mini case study of the neighborhood

CUF. This neighborhood borders the Heights

neighborhood which is home to UC. Proximity to

a large student body brings economic benefit

during the school year, but also has a more

sinister side. Owner occupants of CUF are

concerned illegal set-outs and dumping of

furniture and household goods predominately

during move-in and end of the year move-out

negatively impacts their property values and

community vitality. Within the University

prioritization of this issue has been low on all

levels. Student groups nor the administration

have tried to tackle this issue beyond

volunteering for clean-up events a few times a

year.

CUF community members have taken action,

going door-to-door and educating students

about the City’s rules pertaining to garbage in an

effort to reduce the problem. Community

organizations have also rallied against this

issue, encouraging citizens to report dumping to

the City.

Suggestions may be transferrable to other Universities: Educate students about City app and trash protocol through Orientation, email blasts before

move-in/ move-out, and including the information on UC Mobile App/ University website.

Consider doing door-hanger educational campaign for proper protocol on problem streets.

Ask Student Senate or other active student groups to mobilize around issue.

Increase dumping enforcement during move-out.

Continue to offer DPS extended curbside pick-up services and dumpster service for landlords

during move-in and move-out.

Work with Landlords:

o Educate about proper practices and heightened enforcement.

o Encourage highlighting the responsibility of tenants to comply with city ordinances

pertaining to trash, litter, and weeds in leases.

o Suggest offering staffed dumpsters on their property during high volume times.

Make Donation Easy Partner with Goodwill Industries during Move-Out to provide a free, convenient, and charitable alternative option to dumping. Program utilized at Miami U. and Northern Kentucky U., as well as on the community level in Blue Ash and more. Interest has been expressed by Goodwill to move forward with this suggestion for UC. Contact Goodwill’s external event manager, Eric Scott at (513)771-4800 for more details. Habitat’s ReStore has also expressed interest in creating Move-Out programs at UC after launching successful programs at Miami U and Xavier. Contact Casey Huber for further details at (513)482-5615.

43

CONCLUSION

What can you do? Participate in clean-ups (sign up here).

Formally through KCB, or informally adopt a

block, street, or park to clean up or organize

clean-ups in your neighborhood.

Report all dumping and dumpsites you see.

If you aren’t part of the solution, you are

part of the problem. Rally your community

and take ownership of your neighborhood.

Dumping is both a symptom and cause of

cyclical blight strongly tied to low socioeconomic

status. Although a complex problem, this report

is intended to empower stakeholders to

implement impactful solutions. There is no 90

day plan to rid Cincinnati of dumping. But, there

are holistic action-steps we can take as a

community to create a cleaner, healthier, safer,

and more beautiful future.

Imagine Cincinnati in 15 years. Picture driving

through the City’s neighborhoods and reflecting

on the amazing effort to increase citizen

engagement and reduce dumping over a

decade prior. Streets and riverbeds are free of

debris and full of life. Citizens from all

neighborhoods are prideful of their community

and collaborate to keep it clean. Homes are

being restored and the City’s character is more

charming than ever. Together, citizens, policy

makers, developers, public employees, and

activists have the power to make this vision

reality.

44

DEFINITIONS

Disposal: "Disposal" or "Dispose" shall mean the discharge, deposit, dumping, spilling, leaking,

emitting, or placing of any waste material on any land, except if the disposition or placement

constitutes temporary storage or treatment. Disposal shall not mean injection into any land by well or

otherwise, which shall be prohibited on any land in the city. (CMC Sec. 729-1-D)

Garbage: putrescible animal and vegetable wastes resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking

and consumption of food. (CMC Sec. 714-1-G)

Initial Violation: a violation at a property under Section 714-35, 714-37, or 714-39, unless the violation

meets the requirements of a "Subsequent Violation" as defined in Section 714-1-S. (CMC Sec. 714-1-

I)

Litter: garbage, refuse and rubbish, as defined herein, and all other waste material which, if thrown or

deposited as herein prohibited, tends to create a danger to public health, safety and welfare. (CMC

Sec. 714-1-L)

Open Dumping: "Open Dumping" or "Dumping" shall mean the depositing of waste into a body or

stream of water or onto the surface of the ground at a site that is not licensed as a solid waste facility

under Section 3734.05 of the Ohio Revised Code. (CMC Sec. 729-1-O)

Refuse: all putrescible and nonputrescible solid wastes (except body wastes), including garbage,

rubbish, ashes, street cleanings, dead animals, abandoned automobiles and solid market and

industrial wastes. (CMC Sec. 714-1-R)

Rubbish: nonputrescible solid wastes consisting of both combustible and noncombustible wastes,

such as paper, wrappings, dirt, cigarettes, cardboard, tin cans, yard clippings, leaves, wood, glass,

bedding, crockery and similar materials. (CMC Sec. 714-1-R1)

Scrap Tire: Any unwanted or discarded tire, regardless of size, that has been removed from its

original use. (HCRSWD)

Yard Trimmings: Also referred to as yard waste. Includes any unwanted grass clippings, leaves,

brush, or wood resulting from residential yard maintenance. (HCRSWD)

45

KEY CONTACTS

Industry/ Business: Bill Burwinkel

Charles Tassell

Larry Riddle (Rumpke)

Eric Scott (Goodwill)

Ross Meyers (United Way)

Casey Huber (Habitat for Humanity ReStore)

Community Leaders: Ken Smith (Price Hill Will)

Kevin Wright (Walnut Hills)

Sara Sheets (Madisonville)

Patricia Garry (Community Development

Corporations Association of Greater

Cincinnati)

Cherie Hill-Wallpe (CUF)

H.A. Musser (Santa Maria Community

Services)

Danny Klingler (OTR A.D.O.P.T.)

Matt Bourgeois (Clifton Heights)

CPD: Sergeant DeMeco Anderson

Officer Jennifer Dawson

Beth Christenson

Lieutenant Joe Milek

DPS: Gerald Checco (Director)

Maraskeshia Smith (Deputy Director)

Tracy Grome (LWCE)

Bill Jacoby (LWCE)

Robert Armacost (NOD Accountant))

Maria Menke-Sunderhaus. (Accountant)

Jude Johnson (NOD, Blitz)

Cheryl Twitty (NOD)

Jerry Wilkerson (Superintendent, NOD)

Damon Ulmer (NOD)

City Staff: Leigh Tami (Office of Performance and Data

Analytics)

Raj Chundur (CAGIS)

James Stanforth (CAGIS)

Sue Magness (DE&S)

Paul Klug (Building Code Enforcement)

James Brunner (Building Code Enforcement)

Cincinnati Prosecutor’s Office: Heidi Rosales

Jessica Powell

Keith Forman

Hamilton County Prosecutor’s Office: Nee Fong Chin

Hamilton County Recycling & SWD: Holly Christmann

Michelle Balz

Hamilton County Public Health Dept. WM Unit: Chuck DeJonckheere

Municipal court Bailiff’s Office: Mike Wolf

KCB: Linda Holterhoff (Executive Director)

Adam Curry

Drew Goebel

EPA: Tracy Buchanan (SW Ohio)

Jon Grosshans

Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney's Office: Heather Robinson (Director of Environmental Crimes

Unit and Assistant Prosecuting Attorney)

SWACO: Kyle O’Keefe (Director of Innovation and Programs)

Kristi Higginbotham (Outreach and Programs Manager)

Keep Montgomery County Beautiful: Brian Fowls

Montgomery County Environmental Services

John Woodman

Montgomery County Sheriff’s Department: Deputy Dingee (Environmental Crimes Officer)

46

ADDITIONAL DATA

Solid Waste Collection DPS

47

Illegal dumping Service Request Seasonality Graph and Chart:

Jan

Feb

Mar

Ap

rM

ayJu

ne

July

Au

gSe

pt

Oct

No

vD

ec

Tota

l

2010

42

1416

814

815

23

52

93

2011

1131

4829

3736

157

1411

43

246

2012

5339

5444

3830

5532

3123

2639

464

2013

2930

5273

7485

6929

2533

2117

537

2014

3761

9611

874

6911

786

6759

6147

892

2015

5135

6572

5864

8555

5164

3547

682

48

RESOURCES

What Goes Where? *List from HCRSWD website and refined for Cincinnati residents.

http://www.hamiltoncountyrecycles.org/index.php?page=recycling-outlets

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/public-services/garbage-yard-waste/

Construction Waste: Home Depot or Lowe’s through Waste Management’s Bagster Program

Purchase a bag online or at the store, fill it with your construction waste, and schedule a collection online or over the

phone through Waste Management.

Hafner C & D

5445 Wooster Pike

Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

513-321-1895

$50.85 for residential pick-up truck load; no minimum charge

Rumpke Landfill

3800 Struble Rd.

Cincinnati, OH 45251

$35 minimum charge for 3 cubic yards or less and $12 a yard extra beyond that

Newtown Fill

7960 Main Street

Newtown, Ohio 45244

513-271-8540

$50 for residential pick-up truck, car, van, SUV load; no minimum charge

Yard Waste (free): Ohio Mulch

Cincinnati residents may drop off yard waste including brush, branches, leaves, grass trimmings, and logs (up to 12 in. in

diameter and cut to 6 feet in length) for free at any of Ohio Mulch’s 5 locations during normal business hours of 8am - 7pm

M-Sat and 10am - 5pm on Sunday. No trash, sod, soil, rocks, or construction debris accepted. Call 513-677-2066 with

questions.

49

Cincinnati Curbside Services: Yard Waste

DPS collects curbside yard waste every other week on the same schedule as recycling. (Residential)

Recycling

Collected on same day as trash, every other week. Rumpke Recycling will collect the materials from your bin

between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. (Residential and Commercial)

Trash/ Landfill

DPS collects City of Cincinnati approved bins every week on the same day. (Residential)

Recycling Drop-Off Sites (free): City of Cincinnati — College Hill

6128 Hamilton Avenue at North Bend Road (behind the coffee shop)

Cincinnati, OH 45224

Corryville

250 William Howard Taft Road (in back parking lot – enter off of Highland Ave.)

Cincinnati, OH 45219

Downtown Cincinnati

-Findlay Market 1819 Race Street

-Parking area located at the corner of Cutter & W. Court Street)

-Parking area located at Third and Butler Streets

-Parking area located at Third Street and Central Avenue

-Parking area located at Seventh and Vine Streets

-The Hamilton County Public Library near the library book return at Ninth Street between Vine Street & Walnut Street

North Avondale

617 Clinton Springs

Cincinnati, OH 45229

Northside

Bulding Value — A building reuse store

4040 Spring Grove Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45223

Open: M - F 8 am - 6 pm and SA 8 am - 4 pm

Springfield Township Civic Complex

9150 Winton Road

Cincinnati, OH 45231

Springfield Township at Stephanie Hummer Park

661 North Bend Road

Cincinnati, OH 45224

Springfield Township at the Grove & Senior Center

9158 Winton Road

Cincinnati, OH 45231

Springfield Township at Clifford George Park

1615 Forrester Drive at Mill Road

Cincinnati, Ohio 45240

50

Anderson Township Operations Center/Fire Department

7954 Beechmont Avenue (near the Park & Ride)

Cincinnati, OH 45255

Alms Park

710 Tusculum Avenue

Cincinnati, OH 45226

Schmidt Field

150 St. Peter (off of Eastern Avenue)

Cincinnati, OH 45226

Vacant Foreclosed Residential Property Registration Link:

http://cagismaps.hamilton-co.org/cincinnatiServices/VacantForeclosedRegistration/

City of Cincinnati Waste Fine Structure (to date):

51

Friday Blitz Schedule:

52

53

City Code:

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 1123-9. - Maintenance Obligations of Mortgagees

During the period that the property is registered, the mortgagee shall have the obligations set forth in this section.

a. Vacant, foreclosed property shall be maintained free of all outward appearances of foreclosure and vacancy

during the registration period including:

(1)No signs or placards on the exterior of the building or in the windows indicating that the property is

vacant or foreclosed;

(2)Grass shall be no higher than 10 inches at any time and all noxious weeds shall be removed;

(3)The premises shall be maintained free of debris and litter;

(4)The premises shall remain secure and locked. Broken windows and doors which are visible from the

right-of-way may be covered with plywood or similar boarding material on an emergency basis, but for no

more than ten (10) business days, while arrangements are being made to replace broken glass or broken

parts of the existing windows and doors

(5)Windows and doors which are visible from the right-of-way may not be boarded and shall be

maintained in good repair;

(6)Handbills, circulars, and advertisements shall be removed from porches and yards in a timely manner;

(7)Standing water on the premises, including but not limited to standing water in swimming pools, shall be

eliminated.

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 729-30. - Dumping Prohibited.

(a) As used in this section, "vehicle" shall include but not be limited to a car, truck, trailer, semitrailer, or pole

trailer.

(b) No person shall dump or otherwise dispose of waste, including acceptable waste, unacceptable waste,

commercial waste or yard waste materials, by use of any vehicle on any public or private property. Any owner of a

vehicle who permits or employs another person to use the vehicle and who knows or should have known through

due diligence that the vehicle will be used for the purpose described in this division violates this subsection.

(c) Whoever violates subsection 729-30(b) shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree or commits a Class

E Civil Offense.

(d) Notwithstanding any other penalty authorized by this section, if the city manager, the city manager's designee

or the director of public services ascertains that a person has violated this section, the director of public services

may remove the waste and the city solicitor may take any legal action necessary to collect the cost of the removal

from the violator.

(e) This section shall not apply to land being used under a City of Cincinnati building or construction permit or

license, a City of Cincinnati permit or license or a conditional zoning permit or variance to operate a junk yard,

scrap metal processing facility or similar business, or a permit or license issued pursuant to Chapter 3734,

Section 4737.05 to 4737.12, or Chapter 6111 of the Ohio Revised Code.

(Ord. No. 311-2014, § 10, eff. Dec. 5, 2014)

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 729-93. - Special Collection.

The director of public services may offer special collection of acceptable waste, including without limitation bulk

refuse, in addition to regularly scheduled waste collection and may establish the conditions pursuant to which

such special collection may be made.

To request a special collection of bulk refuse, the owner of or person responsible for the bulk refuse must call the

city for a determination that the bulk refuse qualifies for special collection prior to placing bulk refuse at the curb

54

for collection. If the bulk refuse is eligible for special collection, the city will make an appointment for the collection

of the bulk refuse. The bulk refuse must be placed at the curb no earlier than 5:00 p.m. on the day preceding the

scheduled collection and no later than 6:00 a.m. on the day of collection. The bulk refuse must be placed

separate from, and must not be co-mingled with, any items that are not bulk refuse.

(Ordained by Ord. No. 54-2003, eff. 4-4-03, r. Ord. No. 128-2003, eff. 4-30-03; ordained by Ord. No. 463-2012, §

4, eff. Oct. 7, 2013)

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 714-11. - Duty to Keep Sidewalks Free of Litter.

No person owning or occupying a place of business shall sweep into or deposit in any gutter, street or other public

place within the city the accumulation of litter from any building or lot or from any public or private sidewalk or

driveway. Any person, being the owner, agent, lessee, occupant or person otherwise in charge or control of any

premises abutting a city street, shall, after notification by a police officer, remove, with reasonable promptness,

from the sidewalk area along such premises, all debris, rubbish, litter and other matter which may at any time

accumulate or be deposited thereon from any cause whatever.

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 729-1-B. - Bulk Refuse.

"Bulk refuse" shall mean acceptable waste that requires special collection arrangements due to size, weight, or

shape. Bulk refuse is individual items that weigh more than 40 pounds, exceed 48 inches in length, or exceed 100

inches in overall dimension (the total of length plus width plus depth), which cannot reasonably be divided or

disassembled into smaller items. Bulk refuse is not a large container filled with smaller items or a large pile of

small items, and these items are not eligible for collection pursuant to Section 729-93.

(Ordained by Ord. No. 463-2012, § 4, eff. Oct. 7, 2013)

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 714-13. - Littering by Operators and Occupants of Motor Vehicles.

(a) No operator or occupant of a motor vehicle shall, regardless of intent, throw, drop, discard or deposit litter from

any motor vehicle in operation upon any street, road, or highway, except into a litter receptacle in a manner that

prevents its being carried away or deposited by the elements.

(b) No operator of a motor vehicle in operation upon any street, road, or highway shall allow litter to be thrown,

dropped, discarded, or deposited from the motor vehicle, except into a litter receptacle in a manner that prevents

its being carried away or deposited by the elements.

(c) As used in this section, "litter" means garbage, trash, waste, rubbish, ashes, cans, bottles, wire, paper,

cartons, boxes, automobile parts, furniture, glass, or anything else of an unsightly or unsanitary nature.

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 729-71. - Personal Property Left or Abandoned on Streets and Sidewalks.

Personal property shall not be abandoned or allowed to remain upon public streets or sidewalks by reason of

eviction or otherwise. Such personal property shall be considered waste or litter if it is not immediately removed

by its owner and shall be subject to enforcement of any other applicable provisions of this code. The city of

Cincinnati may collect such property as a special collection provided such property meets the requirements of

Section 729-93.

The city of Cincinnati shall not assume any liability of any type for any personal property, either abandoned on the

street or sidewalk, or disposed of as provided above.

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 714-11. - Duty to Keep Sidewalks Free of Litter.

No person owning or occupying a place of business shall sweep into or deposit in any gutter, street or other public

place within the city the accumulation of litter from any building or lot or from any public or private sidewalk or

driveway. Any person, being the owner, agent, lessee, occupant or person otherwise in charge or control of any

premises abutting a city street, shall, after notification by a police officer, remove, with reasonable promptness, from

the sidewalk area along such premises, all debris, rubbish, litter and other matter which may at any time accumulate

or be deposited thereon from any cause whatever.

(Sec. 759-11; ordained by Ord. No. 119-1971, eff. Apr. 30, 1971; renumbered to C.M.C. 714-11, eff. Jan. 1, 1972)

Cross reference— Penalty, § 714-99, 714-99-A.

55

City of Cincinnati Municipal Code Sec. 714-40. - Potential Waiver or Suspension of Fines for Property Susceptible to

Littering by Third Parties.

(a) If a property is susceptible to littering by third parties who are not the owner or person in control and who are

not invited to be present on the property by the owner or person in control, or if the property is susceptible to

illegal and prohibited waste disposal as defined by Chapter 729 by third parties who are not the owner or person

in control and who are not invited to be present on the property by the owner or person in control, the owner or

person in control may be eligible for suspension or waiver of fines incurred for violations of Section 714-35, 714-

37, or 714-39.

(b) Examples of conditions that may make an owner or person in control eligible for suspension or waiver of fines

under this provision include but are not limited to the property's location in a high vehicular traffic area or a high

pedestrian traffic area that subjects it to excessive littering through no direct fault of the property owner; the

property being situated such that parts of it are not routinely visible to the owner or person in control and thus, it is

more susceptible to illegal and prohibited waste disposal, as defined by Chapter 729; and other extenuating or

mitigating factors.

(c) A property is eligible for a suspension or waiver of fines under Section 714-35, 714-37, or 714-39, only if:

(1) The owner or person in control has requested a waiver or suspension of fees and submitted a

proposed abatement plan to directly address the conditions giving rise to the violations within seven days

of the issuance of the notice of violation set forth in Section 714-41;

(2) The owner or person in control has set forth in the request for waiver or suspension the reasons why

the violations are not within the control or the fault of the owner or person in control due to either the

ongoing nature of the litter violations at the property caused by third parties or the property's susceptibility

to illegal and prohibited waste disposal, as defined by Chapter 729;

(3) The owner or person in control's proposed abatement plan

A. Sets forth how potential future violations of this chapter will be avoided or addressed; and

B. Directly addresses the factors that contributed to the underlying violation, but that are not fully

within the control of the owner or person in control due to either the ongoing nature of the litter

violations at the property caused by third parties; and

(4) The city manager or the city manager's designee has approved the abatement plan submitted by the

owner or person in control of the property, with the determination being made in accordance with the

rules and regulations promulgated by the city manager as authorized in Section 714-49.

(d) A property's eligibility for suspension or waiver of fines under this provision is at the discretion of the city

manager or the city manager's designee. The city manager or the city manager's designee may reject, request

modification of, or revoke an abatement plan.

(e) The city manager or city manager's designee's enforcement of this provision shall be governed by the rules

and regulations promulgated by the city manager as authorized in Section 714-49. A copy of the city manager's

rules and policies and any subsequent revisions to such rules shall be submitted to Council for approval prior to

implementation.

(f) A denial of a request for suspension or waiver or fines and the rejection, modification or revocation of an

abatement plan under this Section is appealable to the office of administrative hearings.

(Ordained by Emer. Ord. No. 075-2015, § 4, eff. March 25, 2015)

State Code:

Ohio Revised Code Chapter 3734: SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTES

(I) "Open dumping" means the depositing of solid wastes into a body or stream of water or onto the surface of the

ground at a site that is not licensed as a solid waste facility under section 3734.05 of the Revised Code or, if the

solid wastes consist of scrap tires, as a scrap tire collection, storage, monocell, monofill, or recovery facility under

section 3734.81 of the Revised Code; the depositing of solid wastes that consist of scrap tires onto the surface of

the ground at a site or in a manner not specifically identified in divisions (C)(2) to (5), (7), or (10) of section

3734.85 of the Revised Code; the depositing of untreated infectious wastes into a body or stream of water or onto

56

the surface of the ground; or the depositing of treated infectious wastes into a body or stream of water or onto the

surface of the ground at a site that is not licensed as a solid waste facility under section 3734.05 of the Revised

Code.

Ohio Revised Code 3734.03 Open burning or open dumping.

No person shall dispose of solid wastes by open burning or open dumping, except as authorized by the director of

environmental protection in rules adopted in accordance with division (V) of section 3734.01, section 3734.02, or

sections 3734.70 to 3734.73 of the Revised Code and except for burying or burning the body of a dead animal

as authorized by section 941.14 of the Revised Code. No person shall dispose of treated or untreated infectious

wastes by open burning or open dumping.

57

Law Enforcement Guide to Scrap Tires (OEPA, 2011):

58

59

60

61

Thank you for taking the time to understand this serious threat to Cincinnati’s livability and success.

Now, you are armed with the knowledge to move forward collaboratively and ask more, deeper

questions of yourself and peers.

Please contact Alex Slaymaker at alex.n.slaymaker@gmail.com with questions or concerns.

62

63

July 2015

“The Everyday Department.”