How the San Francisco Chronicle, CBS News, KTVU, SFGate, and Oaklandside covered Crankstart’s grant for illegal dumping surveillance cameras — compared to the city audit that found them ineffective.
According to the auditor's report, the cameras from DPW don't result in enough citations to justify their cost. When the annual report was presented to the Privacy Advisory Commission (PAC) last year, DPW couldn't explain the camera locations nor its effectiveness. The footage is sent off-site for viewing and filtering - which is in itself a huge amount of time spent for low yield. These cameras capture video, faces, cars, etc and the data sharing policies are also very loose - having the off-site vendor sign off on a generic release form, and upload footage to a City-owned shared drive. https://www.oaklandca.gov/files/assets/city/v/2/public-meetings/privacy-advisory-commission/2025/11-6-2025-privacy-advisory-commission-meeting-agenda-packet.pdf
Although DPW does now have ALPR, and PAC approved recent expansion of existing Flock ALPR cameras for DPW use for illegal dumping, the actual yield so far has been minimal, as was described in this article.
As for the drone program - this is a pilot program, in which Oakland is the first city to use the technology. The founder/creator/engineer noted at PAC that the training set is about 15,000 photos of trash piles around his neighborhood. The drones are used to scan and create new 311 requests and prioritize existing 311 requests. It can also close 311 requests once the site is cleaned up.
However, the auditor's report describes how this "proactive" reporting leads to increased lead times for crews to clean up dumping sites and increased community frustration - so DPW actually returned to just responding to 311 requests (a "reactive" approach). In addition, this does not prevent recurrent dumping at the site.
I'm just including this additional information because I do believe the auditor's report is an excellent analysis of a very complicated topic and has concrete observations and recommendations, which unfortunately are not being heeded by the rest of City Hall. For me, the key finding is that the majority of illegal dumping is residential trash - and the recent report of delinquent trash fees shows that the City is owed over $7 million dollars in delinquent trash fees from property owners that don't pay for trash fees.
Per the report: "If the City fails to collect or recover its costs, including administrative fees, the City’s Mandatory Trash Fund (1700) may incur a loss of up to $2,037,824.00, resulting in a negative Fund balance."
There is one thing we as Oaklanders can do to make a dent in the illegal dumping. There are two big items in the city’s court (renegotiate with Waste Management and legislate the commercial special assessment). These are important, but the public doesn’t control them.
There is an item that we all control. It doesn’t require another program. It doesn’t require permits or even increased enforcement. It is simple. Please help spread the word.
STOP PAYING PRIVATE HAULERS IN ADVANCE FOR THEIR SERVICES.
STOP PAYING IN ADVANCE.
STOP NOW.
The most powerful tool is to collapse the economics of the private junk hauling. Force them to take your “stuff” to the correct location and dump it properly. Require that they send you confirmation that the job was done correctly. They can text a photo of the dump slip. They can text photos of your “stuff” at the transfer facility. Pay them with an electronic application. They can dump, verify, and get paid within a matter of minutes.
STOP PAYING IN ADVANCE.
You can only change behavior by changing the economics. There are times for sticks and times for carrots. This is a time to incentivize the correct behavior versus the widely believed notion that enforcement is the best medicine.
Josh -- Thank you for your comment, as always. You're right that private junk haulers appear to be a big contributor to the illegal dumping issue. But over the years, I've observed that solutions which require consumers to voluntarily change their behavior -- without changing the incentives that drive the behavior in the first place -- are mostly ineffective. At the end of the day, it's the city's job to fix this issue, not ours. As the audit pointed out, Oakland's high prices for legal waste disposal are a major factor in the scale of Oakland's illegal dumping problem. As long as prices remain exorbitantly high, the consumers and junk haulers likely will continue to seek ways to reduce their costs, especially in the current economic environment when prices for virtually every product and service are exorbitantly high across the board. Thank you again for your comment; the discussion is appreciated.
I have a four point plan and had it before the city auditor or civil grand jury released their reports
- better equip OPW
- renegotiate WM contract
- pass special assessment
- pay private haulers with Apple Pay (there is a back story to this one; I’ll tell you in person one day).
I’m in Atlanta right now visiting my three adult children. It is so clean here. It’s the same experience I had in April 2025. The cleanliness is so pleasant. The 24 hour gridlocked traffic is stressful. I’m still betting Oakland gets the trash picked up before Atlanta reduces the miserable traffic. I learned a lot during the one year running public works. I believe no one wants a solution. What would we do with all the free time?
Good article Sean and Phoebe! I always learn something from articles in The Oakland Report. Phoebe has a great mentor in Sean to learn good critical thinking skills and finding the story behind the story. In this case it’s glaring—Oakland apparently has some smart folks working at the Auditor’s office, who the City staff and politicians ignore at the citizens’ peril. It’s not a simple problem but as per usual let’s throw (someone else’s) money at the wrong, least effective solution. Still to be discovered: what actually does Rebecca Kaplan do all day?
Thanks for this article. The way city leaders seem to ignore the audit is mind boggling. They’ve been told what to do—lower the cost. But somehow drones are the solution?
Thank you for this thoughtful article. Is our contract rate simply a result of negotiation, or do those other cities pay more of the share of their residents?
Emma -- Thank you for your comment. Yes, Oakland's waste disposal rates are the result of the city's negotiated contract with Waste Management. This article offers some background on the topic:
According to the auditor's report, the cameras from DPW don't result in enough citations to justify their cost. When the annual report was presented to the Privacy Advisory Commission (PAC) last year, DPW couldn't explain the camera locations nor its effectiveness. The footage is sent off-site for viewing and filtering - which is in itself a huge amount of time spent for low yield. These cameras capture video, faces, cars, etc and the data sharing policies are also very loose - having the off-site vendor sign off on a generic release form, and upload footage to a City-owned shared drive. https://www.oaklandca.gov/files/assets/city/v/2/public-meetings/privacy-advisory-commission/2025/11-6-2025-privacy-advisory-commission-meeting-agenda-packet.pdf
Although DPW does now have ALPR, and PAC approved recent expansion of existing Flock ALPR cameras for DPW use for illegal dumping, the actual yield so far has been minimal, as was described in this article.
As for the drone program - this is a pilot program, in which Oakland is the first city to use the technology. The founder/creator/engineer noted at PAC that the training set is about 15,000 photos of trash piles around his neighborhood. The drones are used to scan and create new 311 requests and prioritize existing 311 requests. It can also close 311 requests once the site is cleaned up.
https://www.oaklandca.gov/files/assets/city/v/2/public-meetings/privacy-advisory-commission/2025/11-6-2025-privacy-advisory-commission-meeting-agenda-packet.pdf
However, the auditor's report describes how this "proactive" reporting leads to increased lead times for crews to clean up dumping sites and increased community frustration - so DPW actually returned to just responding to 311 requests (a "reactive" approach). In addition, this does not prevent recurrent dumping at the site.
I'm just including this additional information because I do believe the auditor's report is an excellent analysis of a very complicated topic and has concrete observations and recommendations, which unfortunately are not being heeded by the rest of City Hall. For me, the key finding is that the majority of illegal dumping is residential trash - and the recent report of delinquent trash fees shows that the City is owed over $7 million dollars in delinquent trash fees from property owners that don't pay for trash fees.
Per the report: "If the City fails to collect or recover its costs, including administrative fees, the City’s Mandatory Trash Fund (1700) may incur a loss of up to $2,037,824.00, resulting in a negative Fund balance."
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:US:3a1c97d3-f1ed-43d2-b9bc-cb4203f35170
There is one thing we as Oaklanders can do to make a dent in the illegal dumping. There are two big items in the city’s court (renegotiate with Waste Management and legislate the commercial special assessment). These are important, but the public doesn’t control them.
There is an item that we all control. It doesn’t require another program. It doesn’t require permits or even increased enforcement. It is simple. Please help spread the word.
STOP PAYING PRIVATE HAULERS IN ADVANCE FOR THEIR SERVICES.
STOP PAYING IN ADVANCE.
STOP NOW.
The most powerful tool is to collapse the economics of the private junk hauling. Force them to take your “stuff” to the correct location and dump it properly. Require that they send you confirmation that the job was done correctly. They can text a photo of the dump slip. They can text photos of your “stuff” at the transfer facility. Pay them with an electronic application. They can dump, verify, and get paid within a matter of minutes.
STOP PAYING IN ADVANCE.
You can only change behavior by changing the economics. There are times for sticks and times for carrots. This is a time to incentivize the correct behavior versus the widely believed notion that enforcement is the best medicine.
STOP PAYING IN ADVANCE.
Josh -- Thank you for your comment, as always. You're right that private junk haulers appear to be a big contributor to the illegal dumping issue. But over the years, I've observed that solutions which require consumers to voluntarily change their behavior -- without changing the incentives that drive the behavior in the first place -- are mostly ineffective. At the end of the day, it's the city's job to fix this issue, not ours. As the audit pointed out, Oakland's high prices for legal waste disposal are a major factor in the scale of Oakland's illegal dumping problem. As long as prices remain exorbitantly high, the consumers and junk haulers likely will continue to seek ways to reduce their costs, especially in the current economic environment when prices for virtually every product and service are exorbitantly high across the board. Thank you again for your comment; the discussion is appreciated.
I have a four point plan and had it before the city auditor or civil grand jury released their reports
- better equip OPW
- renegotiate WM contract
- pass special assessment
- pay private haulers with Apple Pay (there is a back story to this one; I’ll tell you in person one day).
I’m in Atlanta right now visiting my three adult children. It is so clean here. It’s the same experience I had in April 2025. The cleanliness is so pleasant. The 24 hour gridlocked traffic is stressful. I’m still betting Oakland gets the trash picked up before Atlanta reduces the miserable traffic. I learned a lot during the one year running public works. I believe no one wants a solution. What would we do with all the free time?
Good article Sean and Phoebe! I always learn something from articles in The Oakland Report. Phoebe has a great mentor in Sean to learn good critical thinking skills and finding the story behind the story. In this case it’s glaring—Oakland apparently has some smart folks working at the Auditor’s office, who the City staff and politicians ignore at the citizens’ peril. It’s not a simple problem but as per usual let’s throw (someone else’s) money at the wrong, least effective solution. Still to be discovered: what actually does Rebecca Kaplan do all day?
Thanks for this article. The way city leaders seem to ignore the audit is mind boggling. They’ve been told what to do—lower the cost. But somehow drones are the solution?
Thank you for this thoughtful article. Is our contract rate simply a result of negotiation, or do those other cities pay more of the share of their residents?
Emma -- Thank you for your comment. Yes, Oakland's waste disposal rates are the result of the city's negotiated contract with Waste Management. This article offers some background on the topic:
https://www.oaklandreport.org/p/2026-04-27-theres-something-about-rebecca
Thank you again for your comment; the discussion is appreciated.
Where’s Rebecca Kaplan in all of this? Isn’t this her job?