Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07281992 - IO.1 e: TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa y. County DATE: June 15, 1992 STq�'6UN'Sl SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO REQUEST THAT THE COUNTY JOIN THE CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Decline, at this time, the request of the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority that the County join the Authority. 2 . Authorize -the Internal Operations Committee, - on behalf of the Board to Supervisors, to meet with representatives of the Authority, including the City Manager of the City of Walnut Creek, to obtain additional information on the relative advantages and disadvantages of joining the Authority. 3 . Leave this matter on referral to the Internal Operations Committee and request the Committee to report this matter back to the Board as events warrant further reports . BACKGROUND: On April 13, 1992 , the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority wrote to the Board of Supervisors asking that the County join the Authority. On June 15, 1992 representatives from the Authority met with the Internal Operations Committee. At that meeting, the Committee received and reviewed with County staff the attachedmemorandum report from the Community Development Department. The Committee met with the following: Jim Sweeney, Moraga Town Council and Chair, CCSWA Barbara Price, Antioch City Council Gretchen Mariotti, Pinole City Council David Rowlands, Antioch City Manager Don Blubaugh, Walnut Creek City Manager Avon Wilson, Executive Director, . CCSWA Lillian Fujii, Deputy County Counsel Louise Aiello, Community Development Department staff CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X—YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COn. ODER RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE SIGNATURE(S): SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK ACTION OF BOARD ON - July 2o, 1992 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED � OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT.-THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Please see Page 2 . ATTESTED. " '� 6, /'??a-, PHI ATCHEL R,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382 (10/88) BY DEPUTY Councilman Sweeney summarized the points made in Avon Wilson' s letter of April 13, 1992 . In response to a question from Supervisor Schroder about what the disadvantages were to having the County not join the Authority, Councilwoman Price suggested that to be a viable organization the Authority needs to have the County as a member. The Authority would provide a forum through which the County and cities could express a single, unified voice on solid waste issues . Councilwoman Mariotti noted that currently the County acts and the cities have to react. She suggested that it would be preferable if the cities and County were to jointly be proactive on solid waste issues . Mr. Blubaugh commented that under the provisions of AB 939 the County is no longer in the drivers ' seat. The cities now have their own planning responsibility, hence the need for the County and cities to be working more closely together. Louise Aiello summarized the points made in the attached report. In response to a point made in Ms . Aiello's report regarding how the Authority was financed, it was noted that the West County Joint Powers Authority has a $25,000 fee for each vote on the authority. It was also noted that the Central County JPA has a similar fee structure. The Countywide JPA has a fee based on tonnage but may convert to a fee based on population. Councilwoman Mariotti noted that she was relatively new to elective office and that her only interest was in seeing the County and cities work together. She suggested that if individuals don't want things to work, there is always a way to insure that they won' t work. Lillian Fujii noted that the original Authority document which was presented to the County was very hostile to the County. She suggested that if the cities are approaching the subject differently, perhaps the County and cities ought to work together. There seemed to be a general consensus on the part of the Authority representatives that the initial approach to the County had been unnecessarily heavyhanded and that the Authority was now interested in reaching agreement with the County. The general sense was that all issues were negotiable and that if the County did not agree to joint the Authority within the next few months the Authority would probably go out of business . Councilwoman Price asked whether the County is interested in cooperating or whether the Authority was still going to have County staff opposing the Authority. Our Committee is interested in continuing to explore possible membership in the Authority but feels that further discussions with representatives from the Authority are necessary before recommending a final position to the Board of Supervisors . cc: Val Alexeeff, Director Growth Management and Economic Development Agency Harvey Bragdon, Community Development Director Victor J. Westman, County Counsel Louise Aiello, AB 939 Program Manager, CDD Avon Wilson, Executive Director, CCSWA 2 c 400 �a - ' �► Contra Costa Solid Waste Author � COSTA DE rij.' - Aeon M. Wilson ��{J��P Executive Director April 13, 1992 T 4 73 7 Imhoff Place,Suite 4 Martinez.CA 94553 1510)229-9113 FAX(510)229-9111; An.,. Honorable Sunne Wright McPeak, Chair Board of Supervisors ` Contra Costa County 2301 Stanwell Drive S �;. .. ` Concord, CA 94520 Sar'::.. .= Subject: Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority E Cr - Dear Supervisor McPeak: The Board of the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority, wishes to convey to the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors its continued ,.::... commitment in having all solid waste franchising entities in Contra Costa County become partners in a solid waste joint powers 0. authority. Believing that solid waste management and the interest Y. of citizens would be better served if all such entities sat down at the same table to plan together, we would like to begin new dialogue with representatives of Contra Costa County with this objective in mind. Because escalating economic pressures on all levels of local government mandate better coordination and efficiencies in planWing and program delivery, the Authority believes the time is right to look at how this proposed partnership can benefit the County, cities, sanitary districts and private sector alike. Within a positive and productive framework, we would like to begin discussions anew; looking for areas of commonality rather than differences; opening the door to creative solutions for institutional obstacles: accommodating our respective concerr+s and needs. As you well know, the need to work cooperatively and speak with one unified voice was painfully clear when representatives of Contra Costa jurisdictions were forced to negotiate export of Contra Costa garbage to neighboring counties. Our failure to successfully negotiate a plastic collection agreement with a plastic processor was due in part-to having too many voices. While the formation of a Memorandum of Understanding for export of garbage sufficed in the short-term, it did not carry the same clout as that wielded by our colleagues on the Alameda Solid Waste Authority. We need that ongoing clout and unity. ®Recycled Paper April 13, 1992 Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority Page 2 If you agree that unity and coordination of solid waste activities has merit, we request that you define the process by which you would like discussions to begin. We are sensitive to the need for building mutual respect and understanding for each other's priorities and constraints. We are committed to providing that openness as the foundation for fruitful dialogue. Sin , �1 Av n M. Wilson " Interim Executive Director cc: Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Phil Batchelor Louise Aiello CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT June 10, 1992 TO: Internal. Operations Committee (Supervisors Schroder and McPeak) FROM: Charles A. Zahn, ssistant Director--Conservation BY: Louise Aiel County AB 939 Program Manager SUBJECT: Letter Regarding County Solid Waste Authority --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- RECOMMENDATION• Request the County Solid Waste Authority prepare for your Committee' s consideration an analysis identifying the Authority' s proposed jurisdictional solid waste management authority, responsibility, and financing in comparison to current jurisdictional authority, responsibility and financing and to the roles of the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority, Delta-Diablo Sanitation District, the Central County Solid Waste Authority. BACKGROUND: In April, the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority submitted a letter to the Board of Supervisors requesting that the Board define a process by which discussions could begin regarding having all solid waste franchising agencies partners in a joint powers authority. To facilitate your: Committee' s consideration staff has prepared the attached charts which display the current organizations throughout the county involved in solid waste management and a preliminary listing of current jurisdictional authority, responsbility, and financing for solid waste management activities. Comparison of the current solid waste management structure to that being suggested by the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority can provide a basis for any further discussions your Committee may wish to undertake. cc: Val Alexeeff, Director--GMEDA Harvey E. Bragdon, Director--Community Development al/a:jpa.ioc CURRENT COUNTY FINANCING RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY AB 939 Integrated Plan 1990--countywide AB 939 Tipping Fee 1991/92--county share only of AB 939 Tipping Fee and County Resource Rec. Fees AB 939 Siting Element sane as above Preparation of County SRRE and HHWE County share of AB 939 Tipping Fee Implementation of County SRRE and HHWE County share of AB 939 Tipping Fee, Waste Collection fees, Household Hazardous Waste Tipping Fees Establish, receive recommmendations from, and staff--AB 939 Local Task Force and its subcommittees 1990--countywide AB939 Tipping Fee 1991/92--county share only of AB 939 Tipping Fee and County Resource Rec Fees Local Enforcement Agency tipping fees [may not be applicable to 10 cities any longer] Land Use Authority for Solid Waste Facilities located within unincorp. areas Project Application fees +Keller Landfill +Marsh Landfill +ACME Transfer/MRF +proposed EC4/East County +proposed West Co. IRRF +possible So. County Compost Facility Franchising Authority Franchise fees, Waste Collection for waste collection fees +West Pittsburg +Discovery Bay +other unincorp. areas Franchising Authority Franchise fees for facilities within unincorporated areas +Keller Landfill +ACME Transfer/MRF +Marsh Canyon Landfill +other facilities in unincorp. areas cdd/6/92 CURRENT CITY FINANCING RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY Preparation of City SRRE and HHWE City share of AB 939 Tipping Fee, waste- collection franchise fees, city general funds Implementation of City SRRE and HHWE same as above Franchising for waste collection within the city' s boundaries same as above [Central Contra Costa Sanitary District holds responsbility for these items for cities of Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, and Danville) cdd/6-92 al/a:swauth2. to 0) (D (D 0 0 * 0 O 1D 4OM MU (D cD (D C :3 Q 0 •Q)f 0 0 -t (a o o (A 0- co W 0 0 0 CL o o w cn 3 0 3 0 90 FD* cr as (D0 CD (n 3 (n cn ,4 -< o c 0 0 cn ;:v 'a cr . w ;b c 0 (n M -+- - CD cn 0 < = Ju Ej CD CD 0 Zlr Q 0 n 0C) c 0 0 Ti - (D cn 0 CO 0 :3 6- 0 0 10 CD CD 9. 0 =1 0 =r > 0:3 0. CD co m (D 0 CD 0 0 CO) 0 0 0 0 a c 0 CL > 0 C- 0 >M m 0 0 0 0 > CL z 0 > w C) c -— m a) C ca cu C 5 m Z CD W 0 m 0 z 2. a) 3 CL 0 m @ • V) 0 W (D .H�n --+, > C- 0 c 3 0 (D 0 ci I o to .h 0 cu CD (a Ort_ (DCL 0. a FD- CO) 0 CD c- CL a) :3 0 40 r-i 3 o 0 (D c 0 C) cr 0)