HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD MINUTES 03-16-89
40
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING
OF THE DISTRICT BOARD OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA
COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT HELD ON MARŒi 16, 1989
The Di strict Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary Di strict
convened in a regul ar meeti ng at its regul ar pl ace of meeti ng, 5019
Imhoff Pl ace, Marti nez, County of Contra Costa, State of Cal iforni a, at
3:00 p.m. on March 16,1989.
President Rainey called the meeting to order and requested that the
Secretary call roll.
I.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Members: Boneysteele, Dalton, Clausen, Carlson, Rainey
,ABSENT:
Members:
None
II. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
I.II.AWARDS AND COMMENDATIONS
None
IV. MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST
None
V.
HEARINGS
1 .
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMr.ENTS ON THE DRAFT 1989
. TEN-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. PLAN (CIP) AND THE PROPOSED CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FEE SYSTEM FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; APPROVE THE
DRAFT CIP
Mr. Roger J. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the
Board received a detailed presentation on the draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital
Improvement Pl an and the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for
Residential Development at a workshop. Furthermore, staff published and
held workshops for interested members of the public. The one member of
the public present today was at a workshop. Rather than giving a lengthy
presentation again today, staff will briefly summarize the draft CIP and
proposed Fee System. .
Mr. Dolan introduced Mr. James Coe, Associate Engineer, who reviewed
the purposes and maj or goal s of the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Pl an.
Those goal s are to meet regul atory requi rements, accommodate future
growth, reduce O&M costs, conserve resources, coordinate work with other
agenci es, and enhance community rel ati ons. The draft CIP prov ides for
approximately $196 million in capital improvement projects over the next
ten years. Mr. Coe highlighted the impact of these planned expenditures
on the Sewer Construction Fund. It is estimated that, with annual rate
increases, a positive balance will be maintained in the Sewer
Construction Fund for the next ten years.
Mr. Coe introduced Mr. Jarred Miyamoto-Mill s, Seni or Engi neer, who
discussed the implications of the Sewer Construction Fund balance going
below zero. If the balance drops below zero, the District will be
req ui red to use debt f i nanci ng or defer proj ects. The proj ects i n the
current Ten-Year CIP are needed to meet regul atory requi rements and
future growth. To defer those proj ects woul d ri sk a sewer moratori um.
Mr. Miyamoto-Mills reviewed the goals of the Capital Improvement Fee
System, the proposed establishment of a District-wide Facilities Capacity
Fee, and the proposed elimination of the Fixture and Watershed Fees. In
addition, it is proposed that two zones be established in the District to
di fferenti ate between those arèas served by pumpi ng stations and those
areas served by gravity. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills reviewed the approach to the
proposed modification to the annexation fee. A comparison of the current
fees and the proposed fees for three types of rest denti al units were
presented. Mr. Miyamoto-Mills reviewed the implementation
" recommenda~ions for the proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for
~';'03' .... i fi; ;~9
41
Residential Development and the projected Sewer Construction Fund
bal ances if the proposed Fee System is approved by the Board. The
vari abl es which coul d impact the Di strict's revenue requi rements were
di scussed.
Board and staff discussion followed concerning revenue generated by
rising interest rates on investments and fees for multiple units as
opposed to single-family units.
A+ 3:38 p.m., President Rainey opened the public hearing to receive
comments on the draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Pl an and the
proposed Capital Improvement Fee System for Residential Development.
Mr. James L. Hazard, Counsel for the District, stated his
understanding that the fees initially received during the first year of
the proposed fee increase will be used to repay a portion of the costs of
the Stage 5B Expansion and the San Ramon Valley Interceptor Project.
Mr. Miyamoto-Mills stated that is correct.
There being no further comments, it was moved by Member Carlson and
seconded by Member Dalton that the public hearing be closed. There being
no obj ecti on, the moti on was unanimously approved.
It was moved by Member Carl son and seconded by Member Cl ausen that
the draft 1989 Ten-Year Capital Improvement Pl an be approved. There
bel ng no obj ect ion, the moti on as unani mousl y approved.
President Rainey stated that adoption of the proposed Capital
Improvement Fee System for Residential Development will be held over to
the April 20,1989, meeting of the Board of Directors.
2.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLI,CATION FOR AN INTERIM
ADJ USTt-£NT OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATES BY V ALLEY WASTE MANAGEfvENT
This item was taken out of order.
agenda.
It will be covered later in the
VI.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Member Clausen and seconded by Member Carlson that
the Consent Calendar, consisting of three items, be approved as
recommended, resolutions adopted as appropriate, and recordings duly
authorized.
1.
Resol uti on No. 89-022 accepti ng an easement at no cost to the
District from SHAPELL INDUSTRIES, INC., Danville area (Job 4453
- Parcel 4) was adopted and recording authorized.
Motion unanimously approved on the following vote:
AYES:
Members:
Clausen, Carlson, Boneysteele, Dalton, Rainey
NOES:
Members:
None
ABSENT: Members:
None
2.
The contract work for installation of a District-provided
Submersible Pump and Appurtenances, Contract No. TO059P, and a
portion of the Chlorine Mixing System Project, District Project
No. 10044, were accepted and authorization given for the filing
of the Notice of Completion.
Motion unanimously approved on the following vote:
AYES:
Members:
Clausen, Carlson, Boneysteele, Dalton, Rainey
NOES:
Members:
None
ABSENT: Members:
None
i: :.,:03;: .~ 16:{)89
42
3.
April 6, 1989, at 3 p.m. was established as the date and time
for a public hearing to receive comments on the proposed
Capital Improvement Fee System for Non-Residential Development.
Motion unanimously approved on the following vote:
AYES:
Members:
Clausen, Carlson, Boneysteele, Dalton, Rainey
NOES:
Members:
None
ABSENT: Members:
None
CALL FOR REQUESTS TO CONSIDER ITEMS OUT OF ORDER
None
VII.
ENGINEERING
1.
AU"THORIZE $89,000 FROM THE COLLECTION SYSTEM PROGRAM CONTINGENCY
ACCOUNT TO PERFORM A FACILITIES PLAN FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN
WATERSHED 23 - NOR"TH WALNUT CREEK AREA, DISTRICT PROJ ECT NO. 4615
Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that recent
calculations of the hydraulic capacity of the system have indicated some
serious deficiencies. It is recommended that work begin on facilities
planning in this area. A similar facilities planning effort is already
underway in a nearby watershed. This is the next piece of work to
provide necessary capacity.
It was moved by Member Carl son and seconded by Member Dal ton that
$89,000 be authorized from the Collecti on System Program Conti ngency
Account to complete a facility plan for sewer improvements in the north
Walnut Creek area, District Project No. 4615. There being no objection,
the motion was unanimously approved.
1.
VIII. COLLECTION SYSTEM
AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF $67,000 FROM THE COLLECTION SYSTEM PROGRAM
CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT FOR REPLACING A DAMAGED SEWER AT 3970 LOS ARABIS
DRIVE, LAFAYETTE (DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 9507)
Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the Board was
apprised of this situation at an earlier Board meeting. At that time,
the Board decl ared an emergency and authorized the Collection System
Operations Department to work with a contractor on an emergency basi s.
Funds are now requested to cover the costs of that work.
It was moved by Member Cl ausen and seconded by Member Dal ton that
all ocati on of $67,000 be authorized from the Collection System Program
Conti ngency Account for repl act ng a damaged sewer at 3970 Los Arabi s
Drive, Lafayette <Di strict proj ect No. 9507>. There bet ng no obj ecti on,
the motion was unanimously approved.
IX.
PERSONNEL
1.
APPROVE REVISED CLASS DESCRIPTION FOR THE SAFETY AND LOSS CONTROL
SPECIALIST
Following explanation by Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer,
and recommendation of MBmber Boneysteele, Chair of the Personnel"
Committee, it was moved by Member Boney steel e and seconded by Member
Dalton, that the revised class description for the Safety and Loss
Control Specialist position be approved. There being no objection, the
motion as unanimously approved.
2.
APPROVE THE CREATION OF A TEMPORARY PERMIT TECHNICIAN POSITION FOR
SIX MONTHS BEGINNING APRIL 1,1989
Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, stated that the area of
permit counter responsiveness to telephone inquiries and the related high
level of counter activity, is an area that staff has been aware of for
some time. It was recently brought to the Board's attention by Member
; ¡'OS'; 16:.{j89
43
Boneysteele. During the coming year there could be a slowdown in permit
activity although that has not been the case to date. It is anticipated
that the work load during the coming summer will be like that of recent
summers. In the event of a slowdown, there coul d be fewer hours of
supplemental labor added to the permit staff. In place of hiring a new
person, the creation of a temporary Permit Techni ci an positi on wòul d
allow the reassignment of existing personnel to assist with the workload
as needed.
Member Boneysteele, Chair of the Personnel Committee, endorsed the
staff recommendation.
It was moved by Member Boney steel e and seconded by Member Dal ton
that the creation of a temporary six-month Permit Technician position in
the Construction Division, level G64 ($2,718/mo.-$3.290ìmo.), be
authorized. There being no objection, the motion was unanimously
approved.
X.
CORRESPONDENCE
NOTE FOR THE RECORD THE LETTER FROM MR. E. R. SHIREY THANKING THE
BOARD FOR THE EXPLANATION OF THE REFUSE COLLECTION RATES
1.
Receipt of the letter from Mr. E. R. Shirey thanking the Board for
the explanation of the refuse collection rates was noted for the record.
2.
RECEIVE LETTER FROM PLEASANT HILL BAY SHORE DISPOSAL CONCERNING
PREPARATION OF RECYCL ING INFORMATIONAL MATERIAL AND CONSIDER
PROPOSED RESPONSE
The letter from Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal concerning
preparation of recycling information material and the proposed response
to that letter were discussed. Mr. David Olney, of Pleasant Hill Bay
Shore Disposal, was present and stated that he did not object to the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District name and logo appearing on the
mailers or to District staff review and approval of the content of the
mailers. The cost of preparation and mailing was discussed.
Following discussion, it was the direction of the Board that the
District name and logo are to appear on all recycling information
material, District staff shall have the right of review and approval of
all recycling information material, and the cost of preparation and
mail ing, not to exceed $650, shall be amortized over three years. Any
cost in excess of $650 shall be borne by Pleasant Hill Bay Shore
Disposal. Mr. Olney agreed.
XI.
APPROV AL OF MINUTES
1.
MINUTES OF MARCH 2,1989
It was moved by Member Boney steel e and seconded by Member Carl son
that the minutes of March 2,1989, be approved as presented. The motion
was approved with Member Boneysteele abstaining for the reason that he
was not present at the March 2,1989, meeting.
XII.
APPROV AL OF EXPENDITURES
1.
EXPENDITURE LIST DATED MARCH 16,1989
Member Dal ton, member of the Budget and Fi nance Committee, stated
that he and Member Clausen reviewed the expenditures and found them to be
sa ti sf actory ..
It was moved by Member Dal ton and seconded by Member Cl ausen that
the Expenditure list dated March 16,1989, including Self-Insurance Check
Nos. 100335-100339, Running Expense Check Nos. 44819-45070, Sewer
Construction Check Nos. 6840-6882, and Payroll Check Nos. 15786-16042, be
approved as recommended. Following discussion, the motion as unanimously
approved.
03
16
89
~..:, .'
.:' ~. " ,:
{. \. ~
44
XIII.
BUDGET AND FINANCE
1.
RECEIVE FEBRUARY 1989 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Mr. Wal ter N. Funasaki, Fi nance Officer, reviewed the resul ts of
Operati ons and Mai ntenance for the month of February 1989, noti ng that
expenses were $27,000 more than budget, representing a 1.4 percent
unfavorabl e vari ance. For the ei ght months ended February 28, 1989,
actua 1 expenses were $500,000 1 ess th an bu dget, representi ng a 3.5
favorable variance. The District's temporary investments were held in
collateralized certificates of deposit, Treasury bills and notes, and the
District' Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) account with interest rates
ranging from 6.90 percent to 9.20 percent. The latest interest rate as
of February 28, 1989, was 9.125 percent. The average yield for the LAIF
account from January 1989 was 8.69 percent.
Following discussion of the revenue accounts, President Rainey
declared that the February 1989 Financial Statements were duly received.
XIV.
EMERGENCY SITUATIONS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION
None
XV.
REPORTS
1.
GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER
a. The status of the Water Reclamation Project and the joint
workshop with the Contra Costa Water Di stri ct Board of Di rectors was
discussed.
b. Mr. Funasaki, Finance Officer, presented a status report of the
review of Waste Management (WMI) intercompany charges. Mr. Funasaki
stated that the District joined with the Cities of Walnut Creek and San
Ramon and Alameda County in underwriting a review of the WMI intercompany
charges by Price Waterhouse. Price Waterhouse and Arthur Andersen,
representing WMI, agreed on the scope of the work. The report produced
by Arthur Andersen was incomplete. WMI indicated that they were not
will ing to produce the balance of the information because they felt it
was confidential. A letter was sent to WMI insisting that the balance of
the information be provided. WMI responded indicating they would not
provide the balance of the information but would be willing to negotiate
the intercompany charges individually with each of the public agencies.
We have indicated that without the information, we would consider the
intercompany charges unsubstantiated and could not pass them through.
c. Mr. Dolan, General Manager-Chief Engineer, announced that it
was with a great deal of pride that he recently observed the Bay Section
of the California Water Pollution Control Association confer the honor of
Best Large Agency Coll ecti on System Operation on Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District. Central San will be the Bay Section's entry into he
State Collection Systems Awards.
d.
vehicles.
The Di strict i s currently adverti si ng for sal e of surpl us
e. The District will be advertising in the near future for the
$1.3 million Martinez Early Start Project.
f. Mr. Dolan announced that the Environmental Protection Agency's
"enforcement priority" for ~he year w ill be cracki ng down on Pretreatment
Programs run by local agencies. Public sewers are viewed as a major
potential point of entry of toxics into the environment. Under the EPA's
direction, the Regional Board and their consultants perform audits of
major agencies' Pretreatment Programs. The District has been audited.
The audit findings have generally been minor and we are now complying
with all the mandatory changes. However, in Southern California, the EPA
and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board are taki ng an
enforcement action against the Chino Basin Municipal Water District. A
large fine and potential political ramifications could result. We are
proposing to strengthen our Pretreatment Program this year by adding one
Source Control Technician. In addition, we are proposing that the
b111ing function be moved from Planning to Accounting. This will make
"
. . .
\ .. ....
J. ,; :- !it
f .. ;¡ ';[
'. . ~
, .
"
03
]6
~o
45
additional staff time available for pretreatment work. These changes will
be discussed with the Personnel Committee prior to submission to the full
Board.
g. Mr. Dolan announced that he will be attending a Water Pollution
Control Federati on Management Conference pl anni ng meeti ng in Denver on
March 29 and 30,1989.
h. Mr. Dol an announced that the first draft of the Equi pment
Budget contai ns a 1 arge component for repl acement of CSO's worn out
equipment and vehicles. Following staff review, the Equipment Budget
will be presented to the Capital Projects Committee and then to the full
Boa rd.
i. Mr. Dolan introduced Mr. Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manger,
who announced that a meeting was held this morning by the City of
Lafayette to di scuss the i nterim rate increase adj ustment requested by
Valley Waste Management. Mr. Morsen stated that the City of Lafayette
made two recommendations:
1)
That no rate increase be granted to Valley Waste
Management at this time. Rather, that the matter be taken
up with other issues during the normal rate-setting
heari ng.
2)
That Central San hold a workshop session with the
Lafayette City Council and other jurisdictions for which
we franchise, to explain the solid waste situation.
Following a brief discussion, President Rainey requested that this
item be calendared on a future Board agenda.
2.
COUNSEL FOR THE DISTRICT
None
3.
SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT
None
4.
BOARD MEMBERS
a. President Rainey reported that the City of Concord sent a
letter to the Board of Supervisors supporting the District's efforts to
encourage the County to regul ate rates at the i nterim and permanent
transfer stations.
b. Mr. Dol an reported that representatives from the Di strict and
the Cities of Walnut Creek and San Ramon have met with County staff to
request changes in the County Solid Waste Management Pl an. The County
has indicated a willingness to consider the changes.
c. Mr. Morsen reported that the ,District's first three recycl ing
programs are operating in Lafayette, Danville, and Alamo. The first week
was very successful. At the conclusion of the three-month pilot project,
a report will be presented to the Board.
d. Member Clausen reported that at the March 10,1989, solid waste
export negotiations meeting two issues were raised. First, a request was
made to allow the use of pods. This would eliminate the need for a
transfer station. The second issue related to siting a transfer station
in the southern part of the County. Waste Management was asked to pursue
the necessary changes in language with Alameda County.
e. Mr. Dol an announced that a letter was received from Mr. Ken
Little, Attorney for Pleasant Hill Bay Shore Disposal, refusing to permit
Price Waterhouse to gain entry to Pleasant Hill Bay Shore's books.
Mr. Ken Little addressed the Board indicating that Pleasant Hill Bay
Shore objects to the Price Waterhouse firm because of previous experience
'with them and litigation resulting from the Price Waterhouse work. In
addition, Pleasant Hill Bay Shore may not submit a rate increase request
this year. However, no final decision has been made in that regard.
'." ' ",,' ,'¡.' '
;OS 't6 ¡'89
46
XVI.
ANNaJNCEMENTS
Anyone interested in attending the Contra Costa Water District Delta
Conference should let Joyce McMillan know so reservations can be made.
XVII.
CLOSED SESSION
None
xv III.
ACTIONS RESULTING FROM DISCUSSION IN CLOSED SESSION
None
Presi dent Rai ney decl ared a recess at the hour of 5: 10 p. m. ,
reconvening at the hour of 7 p.m. with all parties present as previously
designated. President Rainey proceeded to Item V. 2., Hearings.
V.
HEARINGS
2.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM
ADJUSTMENT OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATES BY VALLEY WASTE MANAGEMENT
President Rainey indicated that the purpose of this public hearing
is to receive public comments and to obtain information relative to the
interim adjustment of refuse collection rates by Valley Waste Management.
Mr. Dol an, General Manager-Ch ief Engi neer, stated that on February
16,1989, the Board of Directors scheduled this public hearing to receive
public comments prior to making a decision with regard to the Valley
Waste Management interim rate adjustment request based on the 87 percent
increase in landfill disposal fees at Acme Fill. At that time, the Board
of Directors sent a letter to the Board of Supervisors presenting
suggestions for rate regulation procedures. Mr. Dolan reviewed the
information learned at the various meetings held on this matter since
February 16,1989.
Mr. Dolan introduced Mr. Walter N. Funasaki, Finance Officer, who
stated that Valley Waste Management has submitted an application for a
33.7 percent across the board increase in refuse collection rates
effective April 1, 1989. This application was made based exclusively on
the 87 percent increase in Acme disposal fees effective February 1; 1989.
Mr. Funasaki stated that other rate-setting issues which would normally
be considered for setting rates for July 1989 include the curbside
recycling program, automated curbside collection, and the interim
transfer station fee. Mr. Funasaki reviewed these issues and the
potenti al impacts on Valley Waste Management operati ng expenses. Mr.
Funasaki summarized alternative courses of action in addressing the
request for an interim rate adjustment.
President Rainey opened the public hearing at the hour of 7:35 p.m.
Receipt of the following correspondence was acknowledged and by reference
incorporated into the minutes:
1)
Mr. Jordan S. Price and Mrs. Lynn E. Price, 1617 Springbrook
Road, Walnut Creek, CA 94596;
2)
Mr. John C.
94549;
Riordan, 3130 Sweetbrier Circle, Lafayette, A
3)
4)
Mr. William E. Kindley, 49 Mott Drive, Alamo, CA 94507;
Mrs. Barbara J. 0' Connell, 4053 Mari anne Drive, Lafayette, CA
94549;
5)
6)
Mrs. A. Lupton, 31 Winfield Lane, Walnut Creek, CA 94595;
Ms. Gwendolyn Damn, 149 La Sonoma Way, Alamo, CA 94507;
7)
Ms. Juanita W. Fall, 724 Morninghome Road, Danville, CA 94526;
03
Ii :: :",~
; ~;6 ~ §f)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
47
8)
Mr. Dennis Krentz, Quandt Area Improvement Assocation; 1214
Woodborough Road, Lafayette, CA 94549;
9)
Ms. Jane A. Pusheck, Round Hill Drive, Alamo, CA 94507;
Ms. Joyce K. Laird, 860 Sibert Court, Lafayette, A 94549;
Ms. Lorraine Satterthwaite, 292 La Questa Drive, Danvllle, CA
94526;
Mr. Robert E. E. Harris and Mrs. Susan Moseley Harris, 3710
Crestmont Place, Lafayette, CA 94549;
Mr. Jonathan Winslow and Mrs. Beatrice Winslow, 708 Glen Road,
Danville, CA 94526;
Mr. Robert W. Hoffmann, 55 Crest Avenue, Walnut Creek, CA
94595 ;
Mr. and Mrs. Norman T.
Danville, CA 94526; and
R.
Heathorn,
15 Shadow Oak Road,
Mr. Robert F. D. Adams, City Manger, City of Lafayette, 251
Lafayette Circle, Lafayette, CA 94549
President Rainey stated that a meeting was held with representatives
of Acme Fill Corporation and they were invited to make comments at this
public hearing.
Mr. Scott Gordon, attorney representing Acme Fill Corporation,
addressed the Board meeting requesting that the March 14, 1989, letter
from Mr. James A. Pezzaglia to President Rainey concerning the Acme-CCCSD
Meeting of March 9, 1989, and containing a copy of the certification for
initial closure and postclosure maintenance cost estimates, be entered
i nto the record. Mr. Gordon stated that Acme received a number of
concerns and questions from the District at the March 9,1989, meeting.
A written submittal is being prepared in response to those concerns and
questions. Mr. Gordon stated that Acme F111 Corporati on woul d be happy
to cooperate in any way they can.
When asked if Acme would cooperate by opening their books to audit,
Mr. Gordon stated a written submittal will be sent to the District. Mr.
Gordon stated that he was authorized to extend the offer of cooperation
and to report that a written submittal will be prepared.
Mr. Sanford M. Skaggs, attorney for Valley Waste Management,
addressed the Board. Mr. Skaggs thanked the Board for hearing the
request for an interim rate adjustment. Mr. Skaggs stated that the imple
question before the Board is whether the necessary cost of di sposal of
the solid waste collected in the franchise area of Valley Waste
Management shoul d be passed on to the rest dents of the area. Valley
mailed letters to 25,000 customers advising them of the situation. The
87 percent increase of disposal fees at Acme results in approximately
$139,000 per month with essentially no notice. Mr. Skaggs stated his
bel ief that the underlying concept of rate setting used in the District
and required by law, is to set rates that provide for reasonable rates
and a reasonable rate of return for the collector. Clearly, disposal of
waste collected is required. There is no alternative for disposal of the
waste at this time. Therefore, it is Valley's position that these costs
are reasonabl e in that they are necessary for the serv ice and must be
passed through to the people creating the garbage for disposal.
Mr. Robert Kahn, 3684 Happy Valley Road, Lafayette, addressed the
Board and distributed and reviewed information and rate-setting
computations. Mr. Kahn suggested that the District condemn Acme and
assume operation and control of the si tee Mr. Dol an responded and
i ndicated that the Di strict feel s that the best option for a transfer
station is a clean break from the landfill and a different site.
Mr. Kahn stated further that the franchise agreement should be
modified to permit reopening of the agreement and initiation of rate
rev iew by the Di strict. In additi on, it i s an unw i se approach to
:.03, ~:16.-:~'89
48'
planning to raise rates for a three or four month period. Mr. Kent Alm,
Associ ate Counsel for the Di strict, highl ighted the franchise agreement
provisions relating to Mr. Kahn's comments.
Mr. Stephen A. Minton, Jr., 3471 Blackhawk Road, Lafayette, stated
that he was not in favor of granting a rate increase to Valley Waste
Management. Mr. Minton urged that the Board take action as soon as
possible to remove the people from the monopoly situation and to place
the people in control of their own destiny with public ownership of waste
collection and disposal.
Mr. John R. Tulley, 3486 Springhill Court, Lafayette, stated that
after hearing the comments already presented he changed his own
statement. Mr. Tulley stated that his main concern is the issue of an
i nterim rate i ncrease based on charges from an unregul ated company.
Residents are already paying for landfill closure. Will the residents
have to pay twice without looking at Acme's books? Other companies have
someone controlling them. Who controls Acme? Before any rate increase
is granted, someone should find out who controls Acme.
Member Clausen stated that the Board of Supervisors has the power to
control Acme. They have chosen not to do so. Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District does not have the power-to regulate Acme.
Mr. J. P. Van Overveen, 1057 Dolores Drive, Lafayette, agreed with
statements made earlier. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District must go
to the Board of Supervisors. , Mr. Van Overveen suggested that an ad
should be placed in a local newspaper advising the people of this
situation. Once the people are aware of the problem, Central San will
have the backi ng i t needs.
Mr. Van Overveen stated that automated curbside collection means
additional machinery and maintenance. The system works well in flat areas
but there will be problems with the topography of Orinda, Lafayette, and
Moraga.
Mr. Boris Isaeff, 293 Paraiso Drive, Danvllle, stated that he
received a two percent annual raise in his retirement as opposed to the
increase requested by Valley Waste Management. There is no way people
can conti nue to 1 ive i n th i s County and th i s State at th is rate. The
Board can and must be prudent in its purpose and policies. The board
must get together with the County Health Department, the Board of
Supervisors, and other agencies to declare a moratorium on bul1ding.
Once you get the people's attention, you will get some action.
Member Clausen requested that the March 7, 1989 letter from Silvio
E. Garaventa, Sr. be entered into the record.
To cl arify the statement made earlier with regard to the i ssue of
the reopener in the franchise agreement, Mr. Alm stated there is no
specific provision. However, as pointed out by Mr. Dolan, there is a
provision which allows the District to gain access to records and
i nformati on on an annual basi s and to re-eval uate rates without bet ng
requested to do so by the franchisee.
There being no further questions or comments, President Rainey
thanked all those who took the time to come to this hearing or to submit
letters. President Rainey closed the public hearing at the hour of 8:40
p.m. and returned the matter to the Board of Directors for deliberation.
In response to a question from Member Dal ton, the 1 egal authority
this Board to obtain the necessary records from Aane or to requi re the
Board of Supervisors to obtain those records was discussed. Mr. Alm
stated that the County has the authority through their entitlements to
regulate rates. The County could obtain information needed to regulate
rates. It i s cl ear that the County has the i nherent power to requi re
rate review at a facility but it is unclear whether they are willing to
exercise those options.
Member Carlson stated that it has been stated that automated
curbside collection services could afford some savings. Not all
increases in the past have been attributed to the cost of services but to
"03, ¡16~{89
49
increases i n serv ice 1 evel as requested by the ratepayers. In the past,
the Board fel t that the costs rel ated to the services were reasonabl e.
The Board has taken an aggressive position over the years. If the cost.
of the serv ice i s the issue, the Board must take a stand to reduce
services to reduce costs. It is hoped that the recycling and automated
curbside collection pilot projects will prov.ide some data for use by the
Board in making that decision. The majority of the people must decide
whether they want to pay more or pay less. Then this Board must mandate
the service level for the least cost while still protecting the health
and safety of the public. Member Carl son stated that recovery of the
costs for previous months is a lost cause. Savings from automated
curbside collection could possibly be used to offset additional costs,
however. Member Boneysteele stated that he strongly supported the
acquisition of Valley Disposal by Waste Management, Inc. for the
following reasons:
a)
Waste Management had an aggressive profit-driven management.
b)
Staff investigation showed that Waste Management had a good
record in most of the other communities that it served.
c)
Member Boneysteele accepted Waste Management's contention that
corruption of local public officials by some local managers was
not condoned by the company.
d)
Waste Management has three of the 20 highest paid executives in
the United States. Member Boneysteele was confident that such
talent would not allow the Contra Costa garbage crisis to
continue to fester.
e)
Member Boney steel e was so enthusi astic about Waste Management
that he drafted a prepared statement which he read at the
hearing.
Member Boneysteele stated also' that he supported the integrity of
Waste Management's exclusive franchise when a citizens' group wanted to
put out the Lafayette recycling project to bid. Waste Management paid a
very substantial premium to acquire the Valley Disposal franchise
contract. That contract provides that rate adjustments are to be made no
oftener than once a year, on July 1.
The first duty of a business holding a monopoly franchise is to
protect its customers--the people who granted the monopoly its franchise
in exchange for assurance of adequate service at reasonabl e rates. In
1670, Lord Hale, Lord Chief Justice of England, established the common
law principle that rates charged by a monopoly must be reasonable. This
principle has prevailed in both England and America for more than 300
years. Although Waste Management has the highest paid executives in the
United States, it has compl etely abrogated its responsi bl1 ity to its
customers. Instead of fighti ng Acme Fill s' ti ppi ng fees, it chose to
rely on the past record of th i s Board. Why engage i n liti gati on i n the
interests of its customers when the more expedient procedure would be to
ask the District to modify the franchise agreement and grant an interim
increase?
Mr. Boneysteele stated further that when the people from Lafayette
asked that the District put recycling out to bid, he declined to support
that request. He stated that he believed that the franch ise contract
precl uded that procedure and he said that a deal is a deal. Member
Boneysteele said the same thing several weeks ago when Waste Management
requested that the Board consider an interim rate increase.
In closing, Member Boneysteele stated that the District has
contracts with its employees, suppliers, and contractors. It expects its
other contractors to live up to thei r contracts; why this overweening
concern for Waste Management? Waste Management's highly paid executives
must have appraised the Acme Fill situation when th~ acquired Valley
Di sposa l' s operations. They may have mi sca 1 cul ated w hen they paid a
substantial premium for what has turned out to be a troublesome
operation. That is a risk that they took, with their eyes wide open.
Th~ have chosen not to fight Aane's charges. Having made that choice,
they should abide by their contract with the District. Waste Management
;,:.~ .. '" .
,. 03" 1 6' ;8 9
50
is large enough to absorb the consequences of its miscalculations and
1 ack of i ni ti ati ve. The Di stri ct shoul d not even be consi deri ng th i s
'request, let alone modifying the contract so that its voters and
taxpayers may be burdened by, still another increase to support Acme's
ever escalating demands.
President Rainey stated that additional information is required. It
is just now coming to the public's attention that there is a problem
although the District has been working on this for some time. President
Rai ney stated that she feel s strongly that the Di strict shoul d conti nue
to work on a transfer stati on. The Di stri ct must set reasonabl e rates
based on a reasonable rate of return. If the rates charged by Acme are
reasonable, Acme should open their books. As Member Boneysteele stated,
Valley Waste Management is in business and in business you must sometimes
take risks.
It was moved by Member Boneysteele and seconded by President Rainey
that the request of Valley Waste Management for an interim increase in
refuse collection rates effective April 1,1989, be denied.
Prior to the vote on the above motion, Member Carlson stated that he
can appreci ate the post ti on of someone in busi ness who i s 1 osi ng money
when a situation develops that is beyond his control and was unforeseen.
Although Waste Management may be a large corporation with highly paid
executives, we are dealing. with a division of Waste Management that is
operated by local management who have been here for a long time. Valley
Waste Management tried to site a landfill and provide some competition.
From a public standpoint, there are some reasonable and necessary costs
that shoul d be addressed. Member Carl son proposed that th is Board
address this issue and provide some relief, recognizing that there are
other issues such as recycling and automated curbside collection that may
impact the situation in the coming months.
Member Clausen stated that he is not averse to making difficult
decisions. However, the Board does not have the facts with regard to the
reasonableness of the charges at Acme. Member Clausen proposed that Acme
be given an opportunity to submit the report th~ have indicated is being
prepared. We are not finished with rising costs of solid waste disposal
in this County. A landfill must be sited in Contra Costa County.
Landfills i n other counties will not allow wastes to be transferred
except through a transfer station. Member Clausen proposed that
consi deration of the i nterim rate adj ustment requested by Valley Waste
Management be hel d untl1 April 6, 1989, to allow Acme an opportunity to
justify their position.
Member Carlson stated that the collector has a legitimate reason for
req uesti ng a rate increase. There i s no other 1 andf 111. They have no
other recourse.
There being no further discussion, President Rainey called for a
roll call vote on the above motion to deny the request of Valley Waste
Management for an interim increase in refuse collection rates effective
April 1,1989. The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Members: Boney steel e, Rainey, Da 1 ton
NOES: Members: Ca rl son, Cl ausen
J'BSENT: Members: None
It was noted for the record that all five Members of the Board of
Directors were present during the entire public hearing and discussion.
03
~6j,:a9
:' , , ,.
XIX.
ADJ OURNfvENT
There being no further business to come before the Board, President
Rainey adjourned the meeting at the hour of 9:20 p.m.
COUNTERSIGNED:
u- ¿, rn
$e et y of the Centr 1 Contra
sa an1tary District, County
of Contra Costa, State of California
03
16
51
89
,