Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 03-16-94 46 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR BOARD MEETING OF THE DISTRICT BOARD OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT HELD ON MARCH 16, 1994 The District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District convened in an adjourned regular session for the adjourned regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority at the Civic Park Community Conference Room, 1375 Civic Drive, Walnut Creek, County of Contra Costa, State of California, at 4 p.m. on March 16, 1994. Chair Clausen, Chair of the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority, called the meeting to order. The Secretary of the District noted the attendance of the following Board Members. 1. ATTENDANCE PRESENT: Members: Dalton, Hockett, Rainey, Clausen ABSENT: Members: Menesini 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS None a. 3. CONDUCT WORKSHOP ON SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FRANCHISING OPTIONS - POST 1 996 REVIEW OF POLICIES RELATING TO THE PREPARATION AND ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FRANCHISING- POST 1996 Mr. Fred Davis, Executive Director, introduced Mr. Roger J. Dolan, of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, who provided an overview of the events leading to the formation of the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority in October 1990, and the purpose and objectives of the Authority. Under AB 939, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) has no role in the future for implementation of AB 939. This is the responsibility of the Cities and County. The District has a series of franchises which expire in 1996. Questions now before the CCCSD Board include whether CCCSD wishes to remain in some kind of franchising responsibility; and if so, what that responsibility should be vis a vis the Cities. There are also questions with regard to the role the Cities with regard to franchising and AB 939 implementation. Finally, there are questions with regard to bidding the franchises in 1996, and a series of questions concerning fee structures, service levels, and so on. Mr. Fred Davis, Executive Director, stated that the Authority is prepared to go out for a Request for Proposals (RFP) for solid waste and recycling franchising and other related matters. In preparation, the AB 939 Project Managers of Authority member jurisdictions have prepared the matrix of franchising issues distributed with the agenda for this meeting. The purpose of this workshop is to go through those issues to resolve any questions that may be outstanding. The Board reviewed the matrix of Franchising Post 1996 Issues, providing comments and input on each item. With regard to the length of the agreement, Board Members Clausen and Rainey felt that a 1 O-year term would be needed to make the contract sufficiently attraci:iJe to generate bids and to ensure commitment of necessary capital. Mr. Dolan, of C(;H,~'al Contra Costa Sanitary District, stated that an eight-year coupled with an index in;lator would be a practical minimum term as eight years is the amortization period for I nuch of the capital equipment used for collection. 03 16 94 47 With regard to rate review issues, Mr. Steve Moore, of Pacific Rim Recycling, expressed a series of concerns about the use of a full risk contract without a balancing account, stating that this may force up the price and preclude some potential bidders from bidding at all. Mr. Moore stated that the Board should consider an arrangement that would allow for sharing of risk. Mr. Ron Proto, of Valley Waste Management, agreed, stating that if an RFP is used that allows for a degree of creativity and the balancing account is eliminated, the objective of achieving a lower price will probably not be realized. Discussion followed concerning the use of a balancing account and the use of a Request for Qualifications (RFO) as opposed to a Request for Proposals (RFP). As the Board proceeds through these issues, Board Member Carr urged that the Board keep in mind that if too much detail is specified in the RFP, some potential bidders could be precluded from bidding. Mr. Davis stated that once the rough draft of the RFP is prepared, Authority staff will meet with anyone who has an interest before the document is finalized by the Board. Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the Authority, reviewed the alternatives with regard to the appeal process. Mr. Aim generally recommended, depending on other decisions made by the Board, that if the Board is in a rate review setting where a substantial amount of discretion is left to the Board, then there should not be an elaborate appeal process. If the Board goes to a non-traditional rate review process such an index inflator, then a much more specific methodology for appeal should be included in the agreement. The Board concurred with the proposal for requiring financials. The Board concurred with the proposal that the amount of residential rate subsidy be determined by each agency. Mr. Proto stated and Board Member Clausen agreed, that the bid document should be very specific with regard to this issue and all others that are to be determined by each agency. The Board discussed the proposal for a uniform rate structure. Following discussion, the Board concurred with the proposal relating to affiliated entity language. The Board concurred that the need for a difficult-to-service rate be determined by each agency. With regard to service issues, the subject of mandatory versus subscription was discussed. Board Member Oliver stated that the City of San Ramon has a mandatory service but customers can petition the City Manager if they can prove they have another legal place to put the solid waste. Board Member Oliver endorsed the concept of mandatory service with provision for an appeal process. Following discussion, the Board concurred with the proposal that container size be determined by each agency. With regard to ownership of containers, Mr. Steve Moore, of Pacific Rim Recycling, stated that over the length of the contract, the containers could be turned over to the ratepayers and the contractor could amortize the cost. Mr. Ron Proto, of Valley Waste Management, agreed that was an option but stated that the contract document should then deal with procedures for containers that are stolen, damaged, and so on. With regard to the issue of automated versus manual service, Mr. Hank Gates, of Lafayette, stated that non-automated service is costing the ratepayers in Lafayette $5 per month or $60 per year. Mr. Gates stated that he favors automated collection and suggested that perhaps the Authority should mandate automated collection. Following discussion, the Board concurred with the proposal that automated service be required except in difficult-to-service areas. The Board concurred with the proposal for implementation of curbside collection. 03 16 94 ---~--------"------------ "--------"---~-------- 48 The number of cleanups was discussed. Board Member Clausen suggested that consideration be given to two cleanups per year rather than three cleanups. The Board concurred with the proposal for collection of wood waste during cleanups. It was suggested that staff communicate with the construction industry with regard to the ability to dispose of wood waste at a lower cost. The Board concurred that the contract allow for special events and that the price be determined at the time of the special event. Following discussion, the Board agreed that free service not be provided to the Cities/County, and that each entity pay the agreed upon rate. Following discussion, the Board concurred with the proposal that residential collection be allowed between the hours of 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. With regard to performance measures, Board Member Carr again expressed concern about being overly specific. Board Member Carr stated that if the Board decides to have some kind of performance mechanism, some kind of formal complaint handling process is also needed. The Board concurred with the proposals relating to liquidated damages and breach of contract. With regard to billing method, Mr. Hank Gates, of Lafayette, suggested that the new contract include provision for sending only one bill and having only one telephone number for service, even if there is more than one contractor. Mr. Paul Morsen, of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, stated that staff will work on this matter and bring it back to the Board for final consideration. Board Member Carr requested information on the costs of billing bi-monthly and quarterly. Following discussion, the Board tentatively concurred with the proposal for Authority ownership of the waste stream; however, Board Member Oliver requested that language be drafted that would make it difficult but not impossible for an entity to regain control of its waste stream. The Board concurred with the proposal for monthly reporting frequency and format of tonnage data. The Board concurred with the proposal with regard to public information. The Board agreed that the issues of franchise fee amount and free service to Cities/County need further consideration. The issue of rate discounts was discussed. Ms. Barbara Hockett, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Board Member, questioned how rate discounts could be spread equitably to those who may be qualified. Board Member Oliver stated that the issue is handled on a case-by-case basis in the City of San Ramon and a targeted public information campaign is used. Board Member Rainey stated that criteria have been established for use in the City of Orinda. The program is administered through the Orinda City Manager's Office. Certain standards are required to qualify since any discounts given must be picked up in the rates. Board Member Carr stated that if the issue of rate discounts must be determined by each agency, it must be excluded from the RFP because it would be very difficult to quantify. Board Member Clausen stated that each agency must work out some sort of reimbursement arrangement. It was the consensus of the Board that Executive Director Fred Davis consider this issue. The Board concurred with the proposals for insurance requirements, bonding, and indemnification. With regard to recycling, the Board concurred with the proposals for materials collected curbside, co-mingled/separated, and size of container. Board Member Rainey suggested 03 16 94 49 that one bin would be easier than adding additional bins as additional recyclables are collected. With regard to ownership of containers, the comment concerning amortization and eventual ownership by the ratepayers was again noted. The previous comment concerning replacement of containers was again noted. The frequency of residential collection of recyclables was discussed. Following discussion, the Board concurred with the proposal for weekly collection of residential recyclables. The Board concurred with the proposals regarding special events, material processor, markets for materials, and materials revenues sales. With regard to multi-family differences, Board Member Clausen expressed concern that the County Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program may not be successful in the long term and requested that this matter be calendared for discussion at a future Board meeting. Board Member Clausen suggested that it may be appropriate to have a drop off centers in the communities. Board Member Carr agreed. Board Member Oliver stated that it would be appropriate for the Authority to wait and see if the County program is successful. If it is not, the Authority may have to address the issue at that time. The Board concurred with the proposals regarding Christmas tree recycling, phone book recycling, recycling center materials and hours, reporting frequency and format, and voluntary versus mandatory recycling service. Mr. Kenton L. Aim, Counsel for the Authority, suggested that no decision be made at this time with regard to commercial recycling since two Supreme Court cases are pending that could substantially impact this issue. The Board deferred discussion of exclusive/non- exclusive commercial recycling franchise. With regard to registration of independents, Board Member Oliver recommended that independents be registered in order to control reporting of what is taken out of the waste stream. Consideration of commercial recycling rate regulation and materials collected was deferred pending the Supreme Court decisions referenced earlier. The Board concurred with the proposal for weekly collection of yard waste. Mr. Paul Morsen, of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, stated that the type of containers for yard waste collection will depend on the disposal facility used. The type of container should be determined after a facility is selected. The Board concurred with the proposals regarding ownership of containers, materials collected, volume allowed, type of collection, and processing facility. Mandatory versus voluntary collection of yard waste was discussed. No consensus was reached. Mr. Jim Sweeny, Vice Mayor of the Town of Moraga, addressed the Board with regard to Mr. Dolan's opening comments. Mr. Sweeny urged that Central Contra Costa Sanitary District continue to represent the Town of Moraga relative to solid waste and recycling franchising. Chair Clausen thanked everyone for attending this workshop and providing input. 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS None 03 16 94 50 5. CLOSED SESSION None 6. ACTIONS RESULTING FROM DISCUSSIONS IN CLOSED SESSION None 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, Chair Clausen adjourned the meeting at the hour of 6: 1 0 p.m. President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Se r ta of the Central Con a Cos a Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California 03 16 94