HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA - 01171989 - IO.5 I. 0. 5
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS S L Contra
FROM: 1988 INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ' Costa
n: s
January 9, 1989 County��,
.Y
DATE: rracouK`�
Proposed Guidelines for Franchising Solid Waste
SUBJECT: Collection in Unincorporated Areas of the County
not Franchised by a Sanitary District
SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 . Supervisor McPeak recommends that the Director of Community
Development be authorized to negotiate franchise agreements
with the existing solid waste collectors in the Discovery
Bay and West Pittsburg areas and forward those negotiated
agreements to the Board of Supervisors for the purpose of
having the Board conduct public hearings on the agreements,
following which the Board would determine whether to approve
the negotiated agreement, modify it, or reject the
agreement.
2 . Supervisor Torlakson recommends that the Director of
Community Development be authorized to negotiate franchise
agreements with the existing solid waste collectors in the
Discovery Bay and West Pittsburg areas, forward those
negotiated agreements to all other potential collectors who
have expressed an interest in bidding on the franchise
business in those communities, and then go to a competitive
bid 'if interest is expressed by one or more collectors other
than those who presently provide collection service in
Discovery Bay and West Pittsburg areas, returning all bids
to the Board of Supervisors for final action on the award of
bids.
3 . Direct County Counsel to prepare the notice referenced in
Health and Safety Code Section 4272 directed to the current
solid waste collectors serving Discovery Bay and West
Pittsburg indicating that the Board of Supervisors intends
to provide or authorize solid waste handling services in
those areas, and return such notice to the Board of
Supervisors for approval.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION F COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
-7—APPROVE OTHER
SI NATURESO /Too-mp//Torlakson
: Sunne W. McPeak
G
ACTION OF BOARD ON January 17, 1989 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
:.APPROVED Recommendations No. 1 and 3 above.
Supervisor Powers ABSTAINED;. stating that he would prefer to go with the
,,Sompetit4ve bid process from the beginning since this is a new franchise
area.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES:
II, I V V NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: I I I ABSTAIN: I OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
County Administrator
CC: County Counsel ATTESTED 8
Community Development Director PH BATCHELOR,CL RK OF THE BOARD OF
David Okita, CDD SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Michael McCabe, Trembath,McCabe,Schwartz,
Evans & Levy (via CDD) WZ"'t, ���✓M382 (,o1j)mFlanagan, Waste Management (via CDD) BYDEPUTY
Op of Y9j s'q T uow ey Jodi r r ijz Z :03MIAT2GA yaswOq. Yoa ivisqu3
90,io.lial wen z ai alto" mala fa_:r.n__psd orifi mcna nimovq WC. sviAjsgmoo
I
I
' I
Page 2
4. Remove this matter as a referral to our Committee.
BACKGROUND:
On December 20, 1988, the Board of Supervisors approved a report
from our Committee on this subject which requested that staff
revise the proposed , guidelines for franchising solid waste
collection in the Discovery Bay and West Pittsburg areas,
circulate those revised guidelines to all collectors in. the
County and report back to our Committee on the responses which
had been received.
On January 9;, 1989, our Committee met with staff from the
Community Development Department and County Counsel ' s Office as
well as Silvio Garaventa, Jr. and Michael P. McCabe, attorney,
representing Mr. Garaventa, and Tim Flanagan, representing Waste
Management. We reviewed letters from Mr. McCabe dated December
20, 1988 and' January 6 , 1989, raising concerns as to why the
Board of Supervisors would want to franchise solid waste
collection in previously unfranchised areas of the County in view
of the competent service which has been provided by the current
collectors. 'These letters also assert the right of the current
collectors to a five-year right to continue to provide service
after notice that the County intends to grant an exclusive right
to a single collector pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
42.72 and a cited California Appellate Court. decision.
Deputy County Counsel Lillian Fujii indicated that her office
still has some disagreements with Mr. McCabe on relatively minor
legal points relative to Mr. McCabe' s December 20 letter.
7n response to Mr. McCabe' s having repeated his concern that he
did riot fully understand why the Board of Supervisors would want
to franchise collection service in an area where service is being
provided at an acceptable level with few, if any, complaints, our
Committee indicated the following .reasons for wanting to
franchise service in such areas:
1 . To Jnsure that recycling was required of the collector
as a condition of the franchise.
2 . To provide the Board of Supervisors with the authority
to' direct the wastestream.
3 . To; provide the County with a source of revenue from a
franchise fee.
4 . To; be able to require fullscale, curbside recycling,
which presently does not occur in the unfranchised
areas of the County.
5. To' provide a mechanism to enforce the County' s
mandatory subscription ordinance.
i
Supervisor McPeak noted her belief that the current companies are
doing a good job and that she is willing to enter into a mutually
acceptable contractural relationship with the existing companies.
As a result,' Supervisor McPeak indicated her preference for staff
to negotiate an agreement with the existing collection companies,
with that agreement being forwarded to the Board of Supervisors
for public hearing, following which the Board of Supervisors
could determine what action should be taken.
I
I
r
Page 3
Supervisor Torlakson indicated his preference for a mechanism
whereby staff would negotiate a franchise agreement with the
existing collection companies, circulate the negotiated agreement
to . all other interested companies and then proceed to a
competitive bid if any other collection company indicated an
interest in bidding on the particular area under discussion.
Supervisor Torlakson noted his concern that unfranchised areas of
the County pay about the same collection rates as franchised
areas, but do not necessarily receive the same level or variety
of service.
Mr. Flanagan,, representing Waste Management, indicated that his
firm was .interested in bidding on both the Discovery Bay and West
Pittsburg areas if the Board of Supervisors requested competitive
bids.
Since we have been unable to reconcile our recommendations beyond
those which are presented above, we forward a split report to the
Board of Supervisors with the request that the Board approve
either Recommendation #1 or Recommendation #2 above.
i
I
i
i
I
I
i
i
I