HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09221987 - 2.5 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on September 22 , 1987 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson, McPeak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Solid Waste Franchising in Unincorporated Areas
The Board received the attached report, dated September
17, 1987 , from Harvey E. Bragdon, Director of Community
Development, recommending certain actions relating to the
regulation of solid waste collection in unincorporated areas.
After discussion by Board members, IT IS BY THE BOARD
ORDERED that the following actions are APPROVED:
1. DETERMINED to regulate solid waste collection in
unfranchised unincorporated areas;
2. DETERMINED to franchise collection; and
3 . DIRECTED Community Development Department to prepare
maps, and draft franchise agreements and procedures
for implementation of franchising or contracting.
CC: Community Development
Health Services.
County Counsel
County Administrator
1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the rnir:utes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: '7
PHIL BAT MEL®R, Cleric of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
B , Deputy
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 3xtra
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON,
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C linty.
DATE: SEPTEMBER 17 , 1987
SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE FRANCHISING OF UNFRANCHISED AREAS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Determine if the Board wishes to regulate solid waste collec-
tion in unfranchised unincorporated areas.
2. If the Board decides to regulate collection, determine if the
Board wishes to franchise collection or assume responsibility
for collection and contract with the private company.
3 . If the Board decides to regulate collection, direct the
Community Development Department to prepare maps, draft
franchise agreements and procedures for Board of Supervisors
implementation of franchising or contracting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
If the Board contracts for or franchises solid waste collection a
franchise fee is recommended. If the fee were to be 5% of the
gross residential collection receipts, approximatly $33 ,000
per year of revenue is projected. The initial cost of establishing
franchised areas may be $20, 000. Annual cost to administer
franchises is estimated to be $10,000 per year. Impact on rate
payers is unknown.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
At the September 8, 1987 meeting of the Board, the Board requested
additional information on franchising unfranchised areas for solid
waste collection. At the September 8 meeting the County Administra-
tor reported to the Board on several questions some of which
concerned solid waste franchising. Potential areas for franchising
are Discovery Bay (approximately 1,150 residential units) , Bethel
Unit/Knightson (approximately 1,550 residential units) , Shore Acres
(approximately 1,300 residential units) , West Pittsburg (approxi-
mately 1, 500 residential units) , Port Costa (approximately 00
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNA
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDA OF POAX15COMMI E
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVI
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOE ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
cc: Community Development (Orig. ) STED
County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Health Services BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
County Counsel AND TY ADMINISTRATOR
BY DEPUTY
L23 :SolidWst.bo
DBO:gms
September 17 , 1987
Solid Waste Franchising
Page 2
residential units) , and Alhambra Valley ( approximately 150 resi-
dential units) . The total estimated franchise units is over 5,000.
Assuming a franchise fee of five percent and an average collection
cost of ten dollars per household per month gives approximately a
franchise fee of $33,000 per year.
It is unknown whether the rates paid by residents will increase or
decrease. If there is competition for service there is a
possibility that rates may decrease. If there is no competition it
is possible that rates will increase because of the additional
franchise fee assessed by the County which will be passed on to the
rate payers.
The County has a choice of franchising as other cities and sanitary
districts do or assuming the collection responsibilities and
collecting the waste by county employees or contracting with a
private company. It is assumed that the County in any case would
contract with a private solid waste company. If the County was to
assume the responsibility for solid waste collection and contracted
with a private company the service charge could be added to the
County Tax Bill, therefore making it prepaid mandatory subscrip-
tion. Staff has recommended this approach be used if the County
was to consider regulating solid wa-ste collection. This was based
on the reduced solid waste storage problem, and enforcement
necessary with this type of system. Either franchising or
contracting would give the County full authority to set the terms
and conditions of service, including control of the wastestream in
the regulated area. The simple franchising option is easier to
establish and administer over the long term but does not have the
benefit of the pre-payment on .the Tax Bill.
If the Board should decide to franchise or contract for solid waste
collection the Community Development Department should be directed
to prepare maps of potential franchise areas, draft franchise
agreements and provide a detailed process for the Board to initiate
franchising or contracting.
DBO:en
L23 :solidwst.bo