HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09131994 - 2.3.� r Item 2.3
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - C,pntra
FROM: Ad Hoc Solid Waste Committee` Costa
Supervisor Gayle Bishop (�ru,.�,}, ,
Supervisor Jeff Smith ^` Coun
���/
DATE: September 13, 1994
SUBJECT: , ACCEPT REPORT FROM AD HOC SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND,JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Accept Report from Ad Hoc Solid Waste Committee; and, -
Consider the following:
Direct staff to work with the Crockett-Valona Sanitary District in developing a Memorandum
of Agreement which continues franchising of solid waste and recyclable collection and disposal
by the District and, in keeping with the District's Recycling Ordinance and current activities,
assures that attainment of the AB 939 diversion goals;
2. Consider Franchise Agreements for Keller Canyon Landfill and for the Permanent Transfer
Station;
3. Consider options, outlined in the attached report, for the levels of local government fees
(franchise, program, LUP fees) to be established for Keller Canyon Landfill and for the
Permanent Transfer Station;
4. Consider requesting membership in the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority with
specific conditions.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
Supervisor Gayle Bishop pe isor Jeff Smith
ACTION OF BOARD ON September 13 , 1994 APPROVED AS FfECOMMENDED x OTHER x
See ADDENDUM A for Board motions and votes?..;
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
AYES: NOES: CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Val Alexeeff (510) 646-1620 ATTESTED September 13 , 1994
cc: Growth Management& Economic Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE
Agency BOARD OF SUPERVISORS-AND
County Counsel C TY ADTIOU
TRATOR
Browning Ferris Industries c/o Tom Bruen BY: , DEPUTY
LA:rw
RLAI:ADHOC-SMBOD
1
Board Order, September 13, 1994
Ad Hoc Solid Waste Committee
- Page 2 -
FISCAL IMPACT:
Reductions to County General Fund may occur depending on the selection of an option, as outlined in
attached report or other option, for government fees.
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND:
On September 6, 1994 the Ad Hoc Solid Waste Committee met to consider collection franchising in
the Crockett area; new drafts of the Keller Canyon franchise and Permanent Transfer Station franchise;
and franchising in unincorporated areas of Central County in relation to the Central Contra Costa Solid
Waste Authority. Participating in the meeting were representatives from the Crockett-Valona Sanitary
District; the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority; Keller Canyon Landfill and the Permanent
Transfer Station; and Garaventa Enterprises. ,
The representatives from the Crockett-Valona Sanitary District pointed out that they have recently
adopted a District Recycling Ordinance mandating recycling of specific materials, that they intend to
establish a mini can program which will reward those who recycle, that they have reached about a
20% to 21% recycling rate, ,and that the District believes it can continue its single truck collection
service more efficiently and at a lower cost to ratepayers than if the County took over the franchise.
Based upon the report from the Sanitary District and the progress it has made in reaching the AB 939
goals, the Ad Hoc Committee recommends that the full Board direct staff to work with the District in
developing a Memorandum of Agreement, as provided for by AB 939, which allows the District to
continue franchising and assures the County that the District will meet the AB 939 goals.
The Ad Hoc Committee reviewed new drafts of the franchise agreements for Keller Canyon Landfill and
for the Permanent Transfer Station (attached as Items # 1 AND #2 and included as a part of this
report to the Board) along with a staff report containing various options related to government fees.
On pages 19-21 of the Keller Franchise (attached) are outlined three (3) options for government fees;
the staff report (ATTACHMENT #3) delineates additional options for Board consideration regarding {
government fees. The Ad Hoc Committee recommends approval of the two franchise agreements and
selection of an option for government rates to be included in the franchise agreements.
The Ad Hoc Committee discussed franchising alternatives and possible County membership with
representatives from the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority (CCCSWA). Under the Joint
Powers Agreement for the CCCSWA each member has two votes without regard to population or solid
waste tonnage. Funding of the Authority is divided among the members equally. The Authority's goal
is to provide collection, transfer, and disposal at the lowest cost to rate payers. The individual
members of the Authority will continue to determine jurisdictional programs;rates may vary from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction depending upon the additional programs and the differences in commercial
and residential customer base within each jurisdiction. The Ad Hoc Committee believes it is
appropriate for the full Board to consider whether the County should pursue membership in the
CCCSWA. Attachment #4 is a copy of the current Joint Powers Agreement governing membership
in the CCCSWA.
LA:rw
RLA1:AdHoc-SW.bod
ADDENDUM A
Val Alexeeff, Director, Growth Management and Economic
Development Agency, presented the staff report from the Ad Hoc
Solid Waste Committee and he explained the four attachments, the
proposed Franchise Agreements for Keller and Acme, the franchise
options staff report identifying alternatives in the rate
structure and the Joint Exercise of Powers 'Agreement which is the
potential agreement with the Central County Solid Waste
Authority. He commented on the matters before the Board to
direct staff to work with the Crockett-Valona Sanitary District
in developing a Memorandum of Agreement which continues
franchising of solid waste and recyclable collection and disposal
by the District, consideration of the franchise agreements for
Keller and Acme, to consider the options outlined in the report
for the levels of local government fees, and to consider
membership in the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority with
specific conditions . Mr. Alexeeff commented on numerous meetings
with City Managers and tours and the results of those.
Supervisor Bishop commented on the first priority for the
County, the Board, should be to provide a safe place to dump
trash at a reasonable rate. She advised that as of last week the
City of San Ramon has opted to direct its wastestream to Altamont
and the County is currently losing $3 , 000 a day as a result of
that action. Supervisor Bishop commended the staff for their
hard work in writing the documents before the Board, and that the
document before the Board was good but it needs numbers and only
the Board can provide the numbers .
Supervisor Smith encouraged the Board to take action to
develop a MOU with the District to exercise our franchise
requirements . He also advised that it would be wise to
participate in the JPA in order to exercise the County' s
franchise authority in the unincorporated areas . He also
requested that a letter be sent formally acknowledging the
County' s interest in participating. Supervisor Smith also
commented on the franchise agreements for the transfer station
and the landfill, advising that the committee had honed the
language but that there were still policy issues and rate or fee
setting issues, and in the transfer station franchise agreement,
the issues of self-haul charges, host community mitigation fees
and the possibility of addressing closure and post-closure costs .
Supervisor Powers commented on two correspondence items also
on the agenda, a letter from Supervisor Powers to Browning Ferris
Industries last week asking for-a commitment in writing to a
tipping fee (Item 1 . 156) , and a letter from Garaventa Enterprises
relative to a rate of $41 . 50 per ton at .the gate which does
include fees ( Item 1 . 157) .
Supervisor Torlakson requested information on the issues of
the valuation study, the interim transfer station versus the
permanent transfer station (status, cost, money collected) .
Supervisor Powers requested response to his memo to Victor
Westman, County Counsel, dated August 22, 1994 .
The following persons appeared and gave testimony:
Tom Bruen, 1990 California Boulevard, Walnut Creek,
representing Browning Ferris Industries, Inc . , commented on
various issues and a letter he presented dated September 12 , 1994
relative to the proposed Keller Canyon Disposal Agreement .
Nancy Fanden, P.O. Box 70, Martinez, spoke in opposition to
the mitigation fees, and she commented on rates being based on
volume and having a state of the art landfill .
Robert Schroder, former Contra Costa County Supervisor,
urged the Board to do what is reasonable in the Board' s mind
relative to franchise fees and extractions to allow the use of
the County landfill and prevent export to other parts of the Bay
Area.
Michael Woods, City Attorney, City of Pittsburg, commented
on the Board preserving and reserving its jurisdiction over being
able to impose the fees that are necessary to mitigate impacts
from the landfill and fairly treat the citizens of the areas most
impacted by the landfill, and he commented on issues of timing
relative to the franchise agreement and the land use permit .
Frank Aiello, 1734 Bridgeview, Pittsburg, representing
Citizens United, commented that the proposed amended franchise
agreements are a violation of the spirit of CEQA and a violation
of the General Plan Amendment that provided for the construction
of Keller Canyon Landfill and he requested that the Board keep
the fees in place.
Lance Dow, 2232 Concord Drive, Pittsburg, spoke on the
fiduciary duty to the citizens and taxpayers of Contra Costa
County, and commented that the franchise agreement allows for the
exclusion of Contra Costa County trash so the capacity could be
sold to others .
Richard Norris, 3260 Blume Drive, Richmond, representing
Potrero Hills Landfill, Inc . , commented on a proposal from his
client, that is before all the cities in Contra Costa County, for
a disposal fee of $33 . 62 per ton for direct haul inclusive of all
fees and costs pending completion of the Pittsburg Transfer
Station and when that opens, the fee there inclusive of all fees
will be $41 . 50 .
Phyllis Roff, Walnut Creek, spoke in support of the Board' s
best judgement .
Barbara Woodburn, 621 Brackman Lane, Martinez, spoke on
relief to rate payers .
Reverend Curtis A. Timmons, P.O. Box 8213 , Pittsburg, spoke
on the obligation of the cities to stand behind the landfill for
which they had expressed a need.
David Tam, P.O. Box 711, Berkeley, representing the San
Francisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club, spoke on community
responsibility for the management of wastes, and he commented in
opposition to the export of waste; and he reiterated the Sierra
Club' s opposition to the road and open space fees .
Mr. Alexeeff responded to Board inquiries on AB 939, the
valuation study, and a copy of comments on Acme which he had
provided to the Board.
Charles Zahn, Community Development Department, commented
that the thrust of the staff report on the proposed changes to
the conditions of approval is to afford the Board the discretion
to set fees through other instruments at other levels not to have
the fees as they are now locked in to specific amounts by the
land use permit .
Supervisor DeSaulnier requested clarification on the amount
collected in fees by Alameda County and Solano County on our
garbage .
Supervisor Bishop responded with the amounts.
Supervisor Powers commented on fees being handled by the can
and looking at the entire spectrum of fees .
Supervisor Torlakson inquired as to whether the Household
Hazardous Fee of $2 . 12 was a part of the discussion to be
reduced.
Val Alexeeff responded that the Household Hazardous Waste
fee is by special agreement with the jurisdictions and is only by
contract and not part of the County collection system, and that
it had not been included as one of the fees for analysis on the
chart he would be providing.
Supervisor Torlakson commented on the history of the
mitigation fees, especially the host community mitigation, the
proposals for reduced rates, and the valuation study costs being
borne by the landfill in its location not as a surcharge on the
rate payer.
Supervisor Bishop commented on the Household Hazardous Waste
fee and she moved to reduce our mandated fees and surcharge to be
all inclusive at $8 . 34, $1 . 34 for the Eastin Fee, the remaining
$7 . 00 to be allocated with number one priority going toward
mitigation, host mitigation, the second being the $2 . 12 Household
Hazardous Waste which at some future point may be assumed by the
cities, the next tier to involve the transportation and open
space mitigation fees under the land use permit and with the
final tier being a County surcharge or franchise out of which LEA
and AB 939 are paid.
There was no second to the motion.
Supervisor Smith moved to have Acme a party to the permanent
transfer station franchise agreement .
The vote on the motion was unanimous .
Supervisor Torlakson moved to direct staff to add language
in the Keller Canyon Franchise agreement to make the cost of the
valuation issue a BFI obligation.
Supervisor Smith seconded the motion and clarified that it
would be a part of the proprietary rate.
The vote on the motion was unanimous .
Supervisor Smith moved that in the Acme Transfer Station
Franchise Agreement under the issue of self-haul rates, should be
something similar to alternative two which says that essentially
the self-haul customers will be charged no more than the market
rate and modifying the language to say notwithstanding 6 . 1, the
gate rate charge to customers delivering less than one ton of
solid waste per day shall not exceed the average of the charges
of all other landfills and or transfer stations providing the
same service in Contra Costa County with similar customers .
Supervisor DeSaulnier seconded the motion.
Supervisor Smith clarified that he just excluded Solano and
Alameda counties and included transfer stations in addition to
the landfills so that it' s saying it has to be the average or in
the market for self-haulers going ,to other landfills or transfer
stations in Contra costa County. ,
The vote on the motion was unanimous .
Supervisor Smith suggested that at Keller, the $1 . 34 Eastin
fee should be charged separately as a dollar per ton fee and at
Acme the LEA fee of $1 . 00 and the AB 939 fee of $ . 15 be charged
separately as $1 . 15 per ton fee and that the Household Hazardous
Waste fee and all other programs which are currently paid for by
different fees in addition to the $2 . 00 for the host mitigation
be coupled into the franchise and that franchise percentage be 25
percent for both proprietary fees at Acme and Keller with a total
in fees of $12 . 24 if BFI really reduces it to $39 . 00 and he
suggested that five percent of that or $1 . 95 be reserved in a
trust fund by the County to assure funding for potential costs of
litigation and closure and if that is not needed it would be able
to be refunded to the rate payers and he so moved.
The Board discussed the motion.
Supervisor Smith clarified his motion is that the $1 . 34
stay at Keller, the $1 . 15 stay at Acme, that the rest of all of
the programs be paid for out of a franchise which is set as a
percentage surcharge of both the proprietary rate at Keller and
the proprietary rate at Acme and that that be 25 percent which
will end up if they reduce their proprietary rate to $39 . 00 will
end up being $9 . 75 and that all the other programs, mitigations,
be paid for out of that money and that we reserve 5 percent of
that for potential costs of closure and litigation and if that is
not needed it could be refunded to the rate payers .
Supervisor Bishop indicated she could not support the
motion.
Supervisor Powers seconded the motion for purposes of
discussion.
Supervisor Bishop again indicated she would not be
supporting the motion, expressing that the amount is not low
enough.
The Board discussed the motion.
Supervisor DeSaulnier concurred with Supervisor Bishop that
it was not low enough.
Supervisor Torlakson advised that he was concerned in the
current motion of the lack of specificity regarding the various
mitigation fees .
The Board discussed the funding of the Household Hazardous
Waste Program.
Supervisor Smith recommended a one year commitment at this
point and committing to find another funding source for the
program after the end of the year.
Supervisor Powers clarified that that was an amendment to
the motion.
Supervisor Smith advised that it was not .
The Board discussed the fees further.
Supervisor Smith clarified that his motion was that $1 . 34
per ton at Keller, $1 . 15 per ton at Acme to pay for 939 and LEA
plus 25 percent of the base proprietary rate of both Acme and
Keller, all of that combined is $12 . 24 if BFI rate is really
$39 . 00 and then in six months we can eliminate $1 . 95 and $2 . 12 if
we can find alternate funding for those revenue streams .
Supervisor Powers clarified that that was an amended motion.
Supervisor Powers clarified that the $2 open space, the $2
transportation and the $2 mitigation were not being eliminated.
Supervisor Torlakson advised he could support the motion in
that context .
The vote on the motion was as follows :
AYES : Supervisors Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Powers
NOES : Supervisor Bishop
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Supervisor Smith moved to send a formal letter signed by the
Chair of the Board requesting membership on the Contra Costa
Solid Waste Authority in a membership status equal to the other
members, advising not to franchise in the unincorporated areas
without the County.
Sue Rainey, 160 Bixley Place, Walnut Creek, invited the
County to join the small JPA.
Mr. Westman clarified that with the action today the notices
that the County gave some years ago that all the franchises in
the unincorporated area would expire in 1995 or 1996 remains in
force and that the Board is not varying that .
Supervisor Powers concurred and clarified that the motion
was requesting to be a member and not to have franchises in the
unincorporated areas executed without Board participation and
approval .
The vote on the motion was unanimous .
Mr. Westman further clarified that the prior action was to
approve the franchise agreements with all the amendments and
changes the Board had asked for together with the Board' s
discussion and approval of Supervisor Smith' s proposal as to the
fees and the direction to staff to put that in final form and
have that executed.
Supervisor Powers concurred.
The Board discussed and agreed on the inclusion of
additional language concerning the issue of the destination of
various types of waste going through the transfer station.
Supervisor Smith moved approval of the franchises with the
modifications and all of Mr. Westman"s comments .
Supervisor Torlakson seconded the motion.
The vote on the motion was as follows :
AYES : Supervisors Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Powers
NOES : Supervisor Bishop
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Supervisor Torlakson requested a report in two weeks on the
three disposal proposals on tipping fees and the status of the
JPA, and he also requested that the memo that the Board has dated
August 17, 1994 on information on rates for the Acme Interim
Transfer Station and the Acme Landfill be reagendaed in two
weeks .
BRUEN & GORDON OCT 1 O 1994
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
1990 NORTH CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD COUNTY
fO11NS L
SUITE boa MARTINEZ,CALIF.
WALNUT CREEK,CALIFORNIA 94596
(510)295-3131
FAX(510)295-3132
October 10, 1994
VIA MESSENGER
Lillian Fujii, Esq.
Assistant County Counsel
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street, 9th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Lillian:
Enclosed please find two fully-executed original copies of
both the Acme Permanent Transfer Station Franchise Agreement and
the Amended Keller Canyon Landfill Franchise Agreement, along
with two fully-executed original Guarantys of the aforesaid
franchise agreements by Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. I
understand that you will send us one executed copy of the
enclosed original documents after they have been signed by the
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors.
Very truly yours,
Thomas M. Bruen
TMB:dcr
Enclosures
{
i
i
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
September 13, 1994
GARBAGE ACTIONS
(Item 2.3)
STAFF SUMMARY
1. Valuation Study
If valuation study results in recommendation that compensation be made to certain property
owners, and County requires BFI to make such compensation, such cost shall not be reflected
in County surcharge. If an adjustment to tipping fee is made, it must be made to BFI's
proprietary rate.
Approved 5-0
2. Acme Transfer Station Franchise Agreement (pp. 22-23)
a) Approve Alternative No. 2 for self-haul rate: Average of charges of other transfer
stations or landfills in Contra Costa County.
Approved 5-0.
b) Approve modification to franchise agreement to include Acme Fill Corp. as a party.
Approved 5-0
3. County Fees
a) Charge the following separately:
1) At Keller, $1.34 (Eastin Bill Fee)
2) At Acme, $1.15 (LEA & AB 939)
Total: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.49
b) Couple cost of all current programs, including HHW &host mitigation fee at Keller
and Acme Transfer Station, into a flat, combined 25% surcharge, of which 5% is to
be deposited in a trust fund for closure and post-closure or related litigation expenses.
At a $39.00 proprietary rate, the County's surcharge will total: . . . . . . . . . . $9.75
GRAND TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.24
c) After six months, County Board will re-evaluate HHW fee and 5% component of
surcharge to determine whether either should be modified, reduced, or eliminated.
Approved 4-1
i
I -
4. Franchising Collection
a) Apply to the Central County JPA for membership; request it not to franchise
unincorporated areas without the County's participation.
Approved 5-0
b) Crockett-Valona Sanitary District: Approved action as recommended in Ad Hoc
Committee report.
Approved 5-0
5. Implementation
County Counsel to make implementing and other, non-substantive, changes to proposed
franchise agreements.
t2 4f"
FIRST AMENDED LANDFILL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA AND
KELLER CANYON LANDFILL CORPORATION
FOR THE
KELLER CANYON SANITARY LANDFILL
Dated: September . , 1994
1 �
TABLE OF CONTENTS - FIRST AMENDED LANDFILL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
RECITALS 1
ARTICLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS 3
Section 1.1 RECITALS INCORPORATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Section 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE. EFFECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Section 1.3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Section 1.4 OPERATOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Section 1.5 COUNTY DISCRETION AND INTEREST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Section 1.6 USE PERMIT OPERATIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section 1.7 NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS 5
Section 2.1 AGREEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section 2.2 ACTIVITIES REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section 2.3 ANALYSIS PERIOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.4 BASE RATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.5 COMMENCEMENT DATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.6 COUNTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.7 DIRECTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.8 EMERGENCY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.9 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.10 GATE RATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.11 HOURS OF OPERATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.12 HOURS OF ACCESS. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.13 LANDFILL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.14 MANDATED FEES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.15 OPERATOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Section 2.16 PERMITS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Section 2.17 POST-CLOSURE MAINTENANCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Section 2.18 REbULATORY AGENCIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Section 2.19 SCHEDULE OF DISPOSAL CHARGES. • • 9
Section 2.20 SITE CLOSURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Section 2.21 SOLID WASTE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Section 2.22 SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Section 2.23 SPECIAL HANDLING WASTE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Section 2.24 SURCHARGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Section 2.25 SURCHARGE PAYMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Section 2.26 USE PERMIT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
ARTICLE 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT 11
August 30, 1994 -i- DRAFT
ARTICLE 4. PERFORMANCE OF OPERATOR 12
Section 4.1 OPERATION OF LANDFILL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Section 4.2 WASTE STREAM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Section 4.3 WASTE TYPES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Section 4.4 UNACCEPTABLE WASTE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Section 4.5 INSPECTION, INVESTIGATION, AND EVALUATION OF
SITE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Section 4.6 PERMITS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Section 4.7 STATUS OF TITLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Section 4.8 GATE FACILITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Section 4.9 OPERATION OF GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . 15
Section 4.10 FEE COLLECTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Section 4.11 PAYMENT TO COUNTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Section 4.12 HOURS OF ACCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Section 4.13 NONDISCRIMINATORY SERVICE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Section 4.14 ACCESS ROADS HAUL ROADS AND SERVICE ROADS. . . . 17
Section 4.15 LITTER MANAGEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Section 4.16 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Section 4.17 RECYCLING/RESOURCE RECOVERY PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . 18
Section 4.18 ACTIVITIES REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Section 4.19 PENALTY SCHEDULE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE. . . . . . . . . . 18
Section 4.20 RECORDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
ARTICLE 5. PERFORMANCE OF COUNTY 19
Section 5.1 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Section 5.2 INSPECTION OF SCALES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
ARTICLE 6. RATES 20
Section 6.1 BASE RATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Section 6.2 SURCHARGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Section 6.3 GATE RATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Section 6.4 INITIAL SURCHARGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Section 6.5 DISPOSALCONTRACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
. ..... . . .:.......
azo >H Q >R ' PSSw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
ARTICLE 7. PERSONNEL 25
ARTICLE 8. LANDFILL GAS 26
ARTICLE 9. CLOSURE AND POST CLOSURE 26
Section 9.1 CLOSURE RESPONSIBILITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Section 9.2 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Section 9.3 PERFORMANCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Section 9.4 SIGNING OF INSTRUMENTS AND DOCUMENTS. . . . . . . . . . 27
August 30, 1994 -ii- DRAFT
Section 9.5 FAILURE TO MEET CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE
OBLIGATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
ARTICLE 10. UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION 28
Section 10.1 ASSURANCE OF UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION. . . . . . . . . 28
Section 10.2 LABOR DISPUTES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
ARTICLE 11. DEFAULT, REMEDIES 29
Section 11.1 FAILURE TO PROSECUTE WORK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Section 11.2 CONVICTION OF CERTAIN CRIMES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Section 11.3 CONDEMNATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Section 11.4 RIGHT TO TAKE/RIGHT TO POSSESSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Section 11.5 FORCE MAJEURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Section 11.6 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 32
Section 11.7 NONEXCLUSIVE REMEDIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
ARTICLE 12. INSURANCE AND BONDS 32
Section 12.1 WORKERS' COMPENSATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Section 12.2 PUBLIC LIABILITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Section 12.3 OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Section 12.4 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SURETY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
ARTICLE 13. GENERAL PROVISIONS 35
Section 13.1 GUARANTY BY PARENT OR AFFILIATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Section 13.2 ATTORNEY'S FEES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Section 13.3 INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT. . . . . . . 35
Section 13.4 ASSIGNMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Section 13.5 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Section 13.6 NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY ENFORCEMENT. . . . . . . 38
Section 13.7 ARBITRATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Section 13.8 CONFLICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Section 13.9 CAPTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Section 13.10 DELEGATION BY BOARD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Section 13.11 SEVERABILITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Section 13.12 MASCULINE GENDER USED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Section 13.13 GOVERNING LAW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Section 13.14 NOTICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
August 30, 1994 -iii- DRAFT
Al
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST AMENDED
LANDFILL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDED LANDFILL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT (the
"Agreement") is made and entered into this , by and between the COUNTY
OF CONTRA COSTA (hereinafter "County") and YELLER CANYON LANDFILL
COMPANY (hereinafter "Operator").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of California has adopters the Nejedly-Z'berg-
Dills Solid Waste Management and Recovery Act of 1972 and now has adopted the
California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, both of which assign certain
responsibilities for the County's solid waste planning, management, implementation, and
regulation to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors; and
WHEREAS, on July 24, 1990, the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County
approved the Keller Canyon Sanitary Landfill Use Permit No. 2020-89 subject to the
Conditions of Approval, the Special Land Use Conditions of Approval and the Findings
Relative to the Landfill Site Land Use Permit pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") and Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Program, each of the same
date; and
WHEREAS, the County adopted Ordinance No. 88-81, which provides that a solid
waste disposal facility may be operated within the County only upon the approval of a
August 30, 1994 -1- DRAFT
t
franchise agreement by the County or upon the operator of a landfill entering into a contract
with the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to prepare the site and operate such
facility; and
WHEREAS, on 4 December 1990 County and Operator entered a LANDFELL
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ("Landfill Franchise Agreement") in accordance with the
requirements of County Ordinance No. 88-81, and to implement the requirements of Land
Use Permit No. 2020-89, which Landfill Franchise Agreement has been amended by
Amendments Nos. 1 through 10, inclusive, thereto; and
WHEREAS, recent United States Supreme Court cases decided under the Commerce
Clause of the United States Constitution generally prohibiting states and their political
subdivisions from erecting barriers to the free flow of solid waste (and thereby discriminating
against interstate commerce) significantly affects the solid waste industry, and affects the
parties hereto in that some of the provisions of the Landfill Franchise Agreement,
particularly the provisions regarding the County's regulation of rates, may no longer be
appropriate or necessary given the current competitive nature of the solid waste industry as a
result of said recent Supreme Court decisions; and
WHEREAS, the parties now desire to amend certain provisions of the Landfill
Franchise Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, the County and Operator, for and in consideration of the
covenants and agreements as hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, do mutually
agree as follows:
August 30, 1994 -2- DRAFT
ARTICLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
Section 1.1 RECITALS INCORPORATION. The Recitals set forth above, and all
defined terms set forth in such Recitals and in the introductory paragraph preceding the
Recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full.
Section 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE. EFFECT. This Agreement is effective on the date
mentioned in the first paragraph of page one hereof, and as of the effective date, replaces
and supersedes the Landfill Franchise Agreement, but does not nullify the Landfill Franchise
Agreement for the period preceding the effective date of this Agreement.
Section 1.3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Operator acknowledges and agrees
that all of the terms and conditions of the Use Permit's Conditions of Approval and any
amendments thereto, are reasonable, legal and valid and that Operator is barred from any
action or proceeding or any defense of invalidity or unreasonableness of said Conditions of
Approval and any amendments thereto, and related County decisions. Further, Operator
agrees during the period(s) that the Use Permit (and its Conditions of Approval and any
amendments thereto) or this Agreement are in effect, Operator will not attack or otherwise
assail the reasonableness, legality or validity of any terms and conditions of said documents,
or of any provisions required to be included in this Agreement by the said Conditions of
Approval and any amendments thereto. The parties acknowledge that the agreement by
Operator in this section is a material consideration for County's approval of this Agreement.
Section 1.4 OPERATOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT. Operator acknowledges and
agrees that this Agreement and the Use Permit (by the incorporation herein of the Use
Permit) provide for and allow (among other things) funding for mitigation, provision of
August 30, 1994 -3- DRAFT
4
closure and post-closure costs, payment to County of annual franchise revenue fees, and
otherwise payment to County and reimbursement of County costs for its governmental
administration of the project entitlements.
It is understood that, among other things, this Agreement provides for Operator's
establishment of its proprietary rates to enable Operator to compete in a solid waste disposal
market that has become highly competitive as a result of recent United States Supreme Court
decisions. This Agreement also acknowledges that sub-county service areas have not been
established.
Section 1.5 COUNTY DISCRETION AND INTEREST. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, Operator acknowledges that County's discretion to grant,
approve or deny one or more nonexclusive or other franchises or similar agreements for
others is not limited or abridged in any manner by this Agreement; and that this Agreement
does not require the approval of any such other franchises or agreements by Operator.
County reserves the rights as part of the negotiation and entry of any such other franchise or
agreement to enter a public-private or public-public partnership with other landfill owners
and/or to pursue any rights of the County to require ownership of those landfills or this
Landfill. _
Section 1.6 USE PERMIT OPERATIVE. Upon the effective Date of the Landfill
Franchise Agreement, the Use Permit became operative pursuant to the conditions of the Use
Permit, entitling Operator to all rights and privilege thereunder.
Section 1.7 NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. With respect to material terms of
the relationship between the County and Operator, the County shall offer to Operator terms
August 30, 1994 -4- DRAFT
at least as favorable as those agreed upon by the County with the operator of any other
landfill within the County with whom the County is currently negotiating or may negotiate
within the Term of this Agreement. If any such material terms are determined for such other
operator subsequent to their determination with respect to Operator, the County shall offer to
amend such terms with respect to operator.
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS
Section 2.1 AGREEMENT. "Agreement" shall refer to this Agreement and is
synonymous for purposes of this Agreement with the word "Contract".
Section 2.2 ACTIVITIES REPORT. The "Activities Report" is a summary
document reporting Operator's activities and overall performance during the preceding
Analysis Period or over such period of time as set by the County. The Activities Report
shall summarize landfill related activities, including, but not limited to: compliance with the
provisions of this Contract and all applicable Permits and Regulatory Agency Requirements,
complaints and corrective actions taken, litter management, landfill gas project update,
wastestream volumes and analysis, operations and safety training, recycling/resource
recovery efforts, Closure Trust Fund status and balance.
Section 2.3 ANALYSIS PERIOD. "Analysis Period" refers to the twelve (12)
consecutive calendar months beginning the first day of January of each year throughout the
term of this Agreement. The first Analysis Period, for the purposes of this Agreement
shall begin on January 1, 1994.
Section 2.4 BASE RATE. "Base Rate" shall mean the proprietary fees charged by
Operator to dispose of Solid Waste or any other waste at the Landfill.
August 30, 1994 -5- DRAFT
Section 2.5 COMMENCEMENT DATE. "Commencement Date" shall mean the
date upon which the Landfill first accepted Solid Waste for disposal under the terms of the
Landfill Franchise Agreement and the Use Permit.
Section 2.6 COUNTY. "County" shall mean the County of Contra Costa, a political
subdivision of the State of California.
Section 2.7 DIRECTOR. "Director" shall mean the County Administrator or his
designated deputy, other County officer or employee.
Section 2.8 EMERGENCY. "Emergency" shall mean a sudden, unexpected
occurrence involving a clear and imminent danger, demanding immediate action to prevent or
mitigate loss of, or damage to, life, health, property, or essential public services.
Emergency includes such occurrences as fire, flood, earthquake, or other soil or geologic
movements, as well as such occurrences as riots, accident and sabotage.
Section 2.9 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. "The Gate Fee Collection
System" shall consist of all equipment, hardware, and software utilized for purposes of
assessing, collecting, and accounting for Tipping Fees for the disposal of Solid Waste at the
Landfill.
Section 2.10 GATE RATE. "Gate Rate" shall mean the fee charged per ton to
dispose of Solid Waste, or other waste at the Landfill. The Gate Rate shall be the Base Rate
plus Surcharge and Mandated Fees, if any. "Gate Rate" shall be synonymous with "Landfill
Tipping Fee" and "Tipping Fee."
Section 2.11 HOURS OF OPERATION. "Hours of Operation" shall be those times
during which the use of heavy equipment and other machinery necessary for operation of the
August 30, 1994 -6- DRAFT
Site in compliance with the Use Permit, the Solid Waste Facilities Permit and this Agreement
will be allowed.
Section 2.12 HOURS OF ACCESS. "Hours of Access" shall be those times during
which Solid Waste may be delivered to the Landfill for disposal.
Section 2.13 LANDFILL. "Landfill" shall mean the Landfill described in Exhibit A
where the disposal of Solid Waste will occur. For purposes of this Agreement, "Landfill"
shall be synonymous with "Site."
Section 2.14 MANDATED FEES. "Mandated Fees" shall be those monies required
from Operator from time to time by any Regulatory Agency for the purpose of funding (a)
Federal, State or regional programs, (b) programs required by the Land Use Permit, or (c)
other County established fees.
Section 2.15 OPERATOR. "Operator" shall mean the holder of the Use Permit or
its assignee.
Section 2.16 PERMITS. "Permits" shall mean any and all governmental approvals,
entitlements, clearances or classifications, including but not limited to, the Use Permit,
general plan amendments, environmental impact reports, zoning approvals, conditional use
permits, waste discharge permits and requirements, facilities permits, permits to operate,
permits to construct, closure plans, building permits, encroachment permits, grading permits,
tree removal permits, tract/parcel maps and all other governmental permits, consents or
approvals as may be necessary to allow Operator to construct and operate the Landfill.
Section 2.17 POST-CLOSURE MAINTENANCE. "Post-Closure Maintenance" shall
mean those activities as required by law to be undertaken at the Landfill, following Site
August 30, 1994 -7- DRAFT
Closure to maintain the integrity of containment features and/or to monitor compliance with
applicable performance standards as specified by law.
Section 2.18 REGULATORY AGENCIES. "Regulatory Agencies" shall mean
Federal, State and local agencies responsible for regulating the operation and maintenance of
sanitary landfills, such as, but not limited to, California Integrated Waste Management
Board, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Health
Services, the Contra Costa County Department of Health Services as Local Enforcement
Agency for handling and disposal of Solid Waste, the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District and the County.
Section 2.19 SCHEDULE OF DISPOSAL CHARGES. The "Schedule of Disposal
Charges" shall mean a list of waste types and corresponding fee amounts to be charged at the
Landfill for disposal of waste types.
Section 2.20 SITE CLOSURE. "Site Closure" shall be the cessation of Solid Waste
disposal at all or portions of the Landfill and subsequent operations necessary to prepare the
Site for Post-Closure Maintenance in accordance with law, Regulatory Agency requirements
and Permits.
Section 2.21 SOLID WASTE. "Solid Waste" shall have the meaning set forth in
Section 40191 of the California Public Resources Code as it may be amended from time to
time, as follows:
"40191(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), 'solid waste' means all
putrescible and nonputrescible solid, semisolid, and liquid wastes, including
garbage, trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and
August 30, 1994 -8- DRAFT
construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof, discarded home and
industrial appliances, dewatered, treated, or chemically fixed sewage sludge
which is not hazardous waste, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semisolid
wastes, and other discarded solid and semisolid wastes.
"(b) 'Solid wastes" does not include hazardous waste or low-level radioactive
waste regulated under Chapter 7.6 (commencing with Section 25800) of
Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code.
"(c) 'Solid Waste' does not include medical waste which is regulated pursuant
to the Medical Waste Management Act (Chapter) 6.1 (commencing with
Section 25015) of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code). Untreated
medical waste shall not be disposed of in a solid waste landfill, as defined in
Section 46027. Medical waste which has been treated and which is deemed to
be solid waste shall be regulated pursuant to this division."
Section 2.22 SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS. "Solid Waste Programs" shall mean
those programs directly related to solid waste which may include: transfer stations, household
hazardous waste programs, recycling and resource recovery programs, Agreement and Use
Permit administration costs (including legal, engineering, and accounting and other costs of
the County).
Section 2.23 SPECIAL HANDLING WASTE. "Special Handling Waste" shall mean
certain Solid Waste materials permitted for disposal at the Landfill which, because of their
volume or type, will require special handling by Operator such as, by example only, sewage
sludge, tires, fencing, large appliances, large dead animals, concrete and asphalt. All Special
August 30, 1994 -9- DRAFT
r
Handling Wastes accepted at the Landfill shall be specifically identified in the Schedule of
Disposal Charges.
Section 2.24 SURCHARGE. "Surcharge" shall mean a special charge as required
by the County and this Agreement, for funding of Solid Waste Programs, closure of landfills
in operation prior to 1990 and for franchise fees and other costs as deemed appropriate by
the County.
Section 2.25 SURCHARGE PAYMENTS. "Surcharge Payments" shall mean those
monies received by Operator as a Surcharge and remitted to the County in accordance with
the terms of this Agreement and of the Permits.
Section 2.26 USE PERMIT. "Use Permit" shall mean Contra Costa County Land
Use Permit No. 2020-89, together with all Conditions of Approval applicable thereto,
including any amendments thereof.
ARTICLE 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall remain in effect until 38.4 millions tons of waste have been
disposed of in the Landfill, or such lesser time as may be prescribed by law. It is the parties
intent that the term of this Agreement shall be the estimated life of the landfill expressed in
terms of capacity as of this date: 38.4 million tons less the tonnage of waste disposed of
prior to the effective date of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 4. PERFORMANCE OF OPERATOR
Section 4.1 OPERATION OF LANDFILL. Operator shall operate the Landfill, in
strict compliance with, and subject to, the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the
Permits and other applicable requirements of Regulatory Agencies.
August 30, 1994 -10- DRAFT
Section 4.2 WASTE STREAM. Nothing iri the terms and provisions of this
Agreement shall be construed to grant rights of exclusivity with respect to Solid Waste
generated in any geographical portion of the County;`nor shall this Agreement preclude or in
any way restrict the County from entering into substantially similar agreements with other
parties for Solid Waste disposal operations at other locations; provided that the terms and
conditions of such other agreements shall not be substantially more favorable to the other
operators than the provisions of this Agreement.
Section 4.3 WASTE TYPES. Operator shall operate the Site in strict compliance
with the Permits and laws; provided, however, Operator may refuse to allow the disposal of
certain categories of Solid Waste after obtaining approval by the County, which approval
shall not be unreasonably withheld. Operator shall provide sixty (60) days' notice to all
affected parties prior to proposing County approval of Operator's tentative decision to
disallow disposal of the affected Solid Waste.
Section 4.4 UNACCEPTABLE WASTE. Operator shall not allow disposal at the
Site of material other than waste allowed by and subject to the terms of all Permits and laws.
It is recognized that some non-approved materials, including certain hazardous wastes, may
occasionally be unloaded at the Site by users thereof. Operator shall train its on-site
employees to recognize such unacceptable wastes and materials. In the event that
unacceptable waste is deposited at the Site, it shall be handled and removed by Operator in
accordance with procedures which shall be developed by Operator and submitted to the
County for approval prior to the Commencement Date. Nothing herein is intended to relieve
the person or persons depositing or causing to be deposited such unacceptable waste from
August 30, 1994 -11- DRAFT
any liability. Operator retains the right to use all legal means to recover costs of removal
and alternate disposal or treatment from such person or persons.
Section 4.5 INSPECTION, INVESTIGATION, AND EVALUATION OF SITE.
Operator acknowledges that it has and shall continue to inspect, investigate, and evaluate the
Site regarding its suitability as a Solid Waste disposal site.
The Site shall be immediately accessible at all reasonable times to Regulatory Agency
officials for any reasonable, lawful and proper purpose. County officials shall usually give
reasonable notice to Operator of their intention to visit the Site or if such notice is not given,
shall notify Operator's on-site personnel of their presence on the Site.
County shall not incur liability arising from the discharge of its inspection
responsibilities, either by commission or by omission, except for its tortious conduct or
breach of duty resulting in death, injury or property damage while engaged in its inspection
responsibilities. The inspection of the work shall not relieve Operator of any obligation to
perform under this Agreement. Operator shall remove and replace or repair any work not in
compliance with those Permits, laws, ordinances or regulations applicable to the Site.
Section 4.6 PERMITS. Operator shall obtain and maintain in force all necessary
Permits and/or other approvals from the Regulatory Agencies for the Landfill.
Upon receipt of each such Permit or approval, a copy thereof, together with all
conditions or requirements attached thereto, shall be delivered by Operator to the Director.
Section 4.7 STATUS OF TITLE. Prior to the Commencement Date, Operator shall
provide to the County reasonable evidence sufficient to establish that Operator is in
possession of and/or has the right to use the Site for the purpose contemplated.
August 30, 1994 -12- DRAFT
Section 4.8 GATE FACILITIES. Operator shall supply, construct and thereafter
maintain gate fee collection facilities. The facilities shall be designed and located as
necessary so as to expedite the fee transactions and shall be attractively finished and
landscaped. The facilities shall be consistent with the Use Permit for the Site.
Operator shall supply,., construct, and maintain truck scales as necessary to expedite
the fee transactions, prevent traffic back-up, and allow for occasional maintenance and
repair. The scales shall be compatible with the Gate Fee Collection System approved by the
County, in accordance with Section 5.1 of this Agreement.
The scales shall be open and in working order during all Hours of Access at the
Landfill. The sole access to the Site for vehicles carrying solid waste shall be the Landfill
entrance, and all waste disposal vehicles shall be recorded by the Gate Fee Collection
System.
Operator shall make provisions for quick repairs of the scales by competent
technicians to minimize downtime. The scales shall meet all State requirements for design
approval and accuracy for State certified scales. Only those scales functioning in accordance
with all applicable regulations shall be used. Operator shall obtain the State of California
certification for scale accuracy.
Operator shall supply, deliver and maintain utilities to the Site and shall be
responsible for all on-site and off-site costs and service charges in connection therewith.
.Section 4.9 OPERATION OF GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. Operator shall
operate the Gate Fee Collection System, including the providing of all labor and materials
necessary with respect thereto. Such operation shall be for all Hours of Access.
August 30, 1994 -13- DRAFT
Section 4.10 FEE COLLECTION. Operator shall collect, count and account for all
Landfill Tipping Fees and waste quantities from each user at the Site. Said fees shall be
collected in accordance with the rates applicable pursuant to Article 6 of this Agreement. In
the event that no scale is operable at any given time, vehicles will be charged based upon the
weight certified by the originating transfer station or based upon a flat fee or volume fee
schedule established by the parties in advance.
Operator shall furnish the County with monthly reports on the number and types of
vehicles and waste tonnages and/or volumes, as appropriate, of the various types and Gate
revenue.
Section 4.11 PAYMENT TO COUNTY. Operator shall pay the Surcharge Payments
required by Article 6 to the County monthly in arrears. Operator shall pay the Surcharge
Payments to County within thirty (30) calendar days after the close of the prior month in
which they are collected.
Section 4.12 HOURS OF ACCESS. For purposes of this Agreement, unless
otherwise required by the terms of the Permits, Hours of Access shall be those specified in
the Solid Waste Facilities Permit. Should the Director declare that an emergency exists,
Operator shall keep the Landfill open as instructed to allow for the orderly disposal of Solid
Waste generated or created by such emergency conditions at no additional charge or increase
in the Gate Rate. The scheduled Hours of Access may be changed in a manner consistent
with permit requirements.
Operator may, in its sole discretion, observe the following holidays and close the
Landfill: New Year's Day, Easter Sunday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day,
August 30, 1994 -14- DRAFT
Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day, or other major holiday as approved by the Director.
Section 4.13 NONDISCRIMINATORY SERVICE. Operator shall provide
nondiscriminatory service for Solid Waste disposal to all users, and shall abide by all
Federal, State and local laws and the Land Use Permit.
Section 4.14 ACCESS ROADS, HAUL ROADS AND SERVICE ROADS. It shall
be Operator's responsibility to provide and maintain all roads required on the property for
purposes of transporting refuse to the actual point of disposal, or transporting earth materials
for fill within the Site, and such other roads as may be constructed for its convenience. Haul
roads shall be well maintained. The surface shall be reasonably free from potholes and
depressions. A safe, all weather access to a disposal area shall be provided at all times.
Section 4.15 LITTER MANAGEMENT. Operator shall maintain and keep the Site
and its access road reasonably free of litter and other refuse. Operator shall be solely
responsible for maintaining the Site in a clean and sanitary condition, and shall be
responsible for any public nuisance created as a result of its operations.
Operator shall control on-site and off-site litter or debris in accordance with the Use
Permit and the Solid Waste Facilities Permit.
Section 4.16 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION. Operator shall comply with all
environmental mitigation measures reasonably and lawfully imposed by Regulatory Agencies
including those imposed by the Use Permit.
Section 4.17 RECYCLING/RESOURCE RECOVERY PROGRAMS. Operator shall
cooperate with the County and reasonably participate in satisfying the ancillary waste needs
of the County, including participation in a County sponsored recycling/resource recovery
August 30, 1994 -15- DRAFT
plan and litter program, and/or any other activity which the County deems is appropriate for
inclusion in the County Solid Waste Programs.
Section 4.18 ACTIVITIES REPORT. Operator shall, by the first day of January of
each year, assemble and provide to the County the Activities Report for the most recent
Analysis Period. The Board may direct, upon ninety (90) days written notice to Operator,
that the report provided in the Activities Report be made semi-annually.
Section 4.19 PENALTY SCHEDULE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE. In the event that
noncompliance by Operator with any condition or provision of this Agreement, or any
applicable Permits or Regulatory Agency requirements is determined by the County, County
shall notify Operator of the identified noncompliance.
Following notification of noncompliance, the Director may impose penalties per
noncompliance upon three (3) days notice to Operator in accordance with the following
penalty schedule until such time as compliance is achieved:
$ 500.00 per day during the first week of noncompliance
$ 750.00 per day during the second week of noncompliance
$1,000.00 per day during the third week of noncompliance
$1,250.00 per day for each day thereafter.
At the time the Director imposes any penalties, the amounts due for each day of
noncompliance shall be the above amounts subject to annual CPI adjustments, the applicable
index to be reasonably selected by the Director.
August 30, 1994 -16- DRAFT
f
.b
Notwithstanding the above three paragraphs;'rio monetary penalties will be imposed
by the County in the event that Operator and/or said Regulatory Agency are diligently
pursuing the process of correction or mitigation of the event(s) causing noncompliance.
Operator shall have the right to arbitrate any action taken by the County under this
provision in accordance with Section 13.7 of this Agreement.
Section 4.20 RECORDS. Operator shall keep separate and accurate records for the
Landfill as provided in the Use Permit.
The County may, at its own expense (which may be recovered as a Solid Waste
program cost), at any time during the term of this Agreement, have the books and records of
the Operator examined for the sole purpose of verifying Operator's compliance with the
requirements of this Agreement. County shall give thirty (30) days written notice to the
Operator in advance of such examination date.
ARTICLE 5. PERFORMANCE OF COUNTY
Section 5.1 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. The computerized Gate Fee
Collection System, which shall be provided by Operator in accordance with Section 4.9 of
this Agreement, shall be approved by the County, which approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld.
Section 5.2 INSPECTION OF SCALES. The County may, from time to time during
regular business hours, inspect the scales and test the accuracy of same.
ARTICLE 6. RATES
Section 6.1 BASE RATE. The Base Rate shall be determined and established by
Operator at its sole discretion. Notwithstanding section 4.13, it is understood that the
August 30, 1994 -17- DRAFT
Operator need not charge a uniform Base Rate to all customers, but may vary the Base Rate
as between different customers based on various factors determined by Operator, including,
but not limited to, the quantity and type of waste delivered by each customer to the facility
and whether each customer has entered into a disposal agreement with the Operator in which
the customer agrees to dispose of some or all of the customer's future waste stream at the
Landfill.
Opefuter shaH at aH times maintain oft file %ith the Gounty, a sehedule of Base Rfttes
Stftfiefi NAefne n
pfopfietart or- Base Rate. The sehedule may inelude a standafd Bme and Gate Rate whieh
sehedul"F Base and Gate Rates shall be updated within ten days of matefial fnedifieatie
• MatefW madifiealiefis inelude, but afe fiet lifnited to,
Base and-Gate Rate, and entefing ef a dispesal agr-eement of ethef agmement with flew
ettstefner-.
The pufpese of this seetien is te ensure that the fates ehafged by Gpei:ater- as weR —es
fees %J st-r-eharges imposed by County as well as ethef gevemmentd ageneies are a matter-
> the Gounty,
August 30, 1994 -18- DRAFT
Section 6.2 SURCHARGE. The County may determine and establish at least once
every two years, effective on the date determined by the Board of Supervisors, the
Surcharge, which shall be added to the then applicable Base Rate, and collected as part of the
Gate Rate. Operator will be provided at least ninety (90) days' written notice of any newly
established Surcharge. In the absence of the County establishing a particular Surcharge
amount, the Surcharge to be collected by the Operator for the County shall be thirty percent
(30%) of the then applicable Base Rate.
Section 6.3 GATE RATE. The Gate Rate shall consist of the Base Rate, Mandated
Fees, and Surcharge.
Section 6.4 INITIAL SURCHARGE. Effective on the effective date of this
Agreement, the Surcharge shall be:
.................................................................
.................................................................
.................................................................
a. % of the Base Rate less the amount of all Mandated Fees imposed and
received for use by the County with the exception of Mandated Fees imposed for 1) any
household hazardous waste program, 2) any fee imposed pursuant to Public Resources Code
section 41901, as said section is amended from time to time, for preparing, adopting and
implementing a countywide integrated waste management plan ("AB 939 Fee"), or any future
similar waste management fee, and 3) fees imposed pursuant to sections 35.1 and 35.2 of the
Use Permit. (It is the parties' intent that the fees described in the preceding sentence shall
August 30, 1994 -19- DRAFT
not be a "credit" towards the % surcharge.)
The parties understand that any fee which may be required in accordance with Section
35.3 of the Land Use Permit (Property Value Compensation Program) are Mandated Fees.
��«�:�:�:::�►ares:::�����:��> �:::�ec�� d::::�o .:.: .:.:�c ?.�e�r.��r€:'� ir�r
♦.:.v..}i,:i:3:.;}}....�::..�.: .............:.:ti:{::{:i :.....::::i.,:.:::.:::r::...i.:::...:•i:•ii:•i::..::?{•i:??•ii:.:i:.i:.::.i:.ii:?•i:?.i...::vn�i:f:.:{::.i•.i,.::.v::::...i,:{.:{....
�:??•:f{{:4:{{.%.:J..:??�:•i::'{??•:?{{n:.i::v.?{:....:v:r:::::::::.:::::vx ?r.�:{.}....:v:.:::::..::::::::•{.vr...v:v:...iii:v::::iiii:?.?:.....i:?{{.:v:r:'v:::::...v.:�:xiiiii:.i:.i:.ri???moi"•ii'{':•i:{.i:i"ii:.:?i::•v .
.. .:<�n:�c�::. �•:::: �h :::: . ::<: :::�c��r:::�et�:::��<::��>: �::::T;ram' 5��:��< d<� � :dx.��
•:v:v;.;...•n:4h::ni}ihiiii:iis3iiii:.????{h}:r?^:trii:Li"ppii}i"::i::...::::::::::::...:v:....;,:....:.........:w::::::::nw:.v::.::.....:•::::.::r::w::r:v..........................:....v..??:ry:? i:::'{::::i
n:i:�:i ...:..n:......... .....:.i.........i:::........i..:v...;:.: ::vi:.:::::F •:i'i{:i:::<}::}i}i:::iii::i +:v::::::v::::::::::.�::..':::i':.i:::'::.:{....::n}i':liii:.:::::i::. .:::�- ;..i:........y:'.:::::.
:..• {><kY ::>n:.:.: .. _.: :y.. :::>:: Imo:::: ::>�(:n2 ;::� � :;::
::>:<: o�......as���.....�.�e�x............i ...... �..............e.....+��e �::'�`rangy.+ .. �€ >:::: � ::: ...:::>
N..r;: :....}:. ..:......:i ....:..::::'...::::..".:i.:.':i' i::...:....is.:..:...:i...:...:....:.r...ii:.iii. .i. .:...ii ...:...::{, ... ....i......ii........:..:� ...i. � .:...:. :�:: ...:..•*'i;: .:'::: :
:.:.
b. For Solid Waste received at the Landfill via the Acme Facility, the Keller
Surcharge and any other Keller Mandated Fees shall be collected at the Acme Facility
together with the Acme Surcharge and any other Acme Mandated Fees.
August 30, 1994 -20- DRAFT
� n
Section 6.5 DISPOSAL CONTRACTS. For all contracts for the disposal of Solid
Waste entered by Operator, the Surcharge applicable at the time of the disposal contract shall
apply for the life of said disposal contract. The parties agree that any later established
surcharge amounts shall not apply to waste received pursuant to such Solid Waste disposal
contract for the life of said disposal contract.
Operator shall advise County of any disposal contract subject to the privileges of this
section immediately upon execution. Operator shall provide County with any and all
information requested by County concerning any such Contract, including providing County
with copies of such contracts upon request.
Y?•:M:i•}:•}s:''•'F.•}::x iw,•.irr:: O}}?tt?:?....,}:??n:?•}:4:•i::n}ti??;xn'f..}'f.?n:{.}}};n:':^}:??ry:??:-}}:•}}}:?GY:'}}}:4::2::}:::??::?.v.r:.....:.::........:.w_::::.:.v:::r v.:..:.:-.r:..:v:v:
'�}� � �-�:S:S��R:L.t:::}�XT�[A�=..Z4�??}:��Z-:v��S: �i�':.:{r.:}y.[.y;•:�].:�y}h: - :}��:.Xl.�Y1.f![{XA1�iX�(•i: %}-:i'i.....•.��••:
G}h:+}Y.'f.::vnv:::x::•r•:•t•v:x•::::w::nv:::.v::.v:::w:•.v:.:::::::::::::::.v:::::::::::...::::::::xv:::r::.v:::.:.w::::..::::::::::v......::::::::::w:::v:.:v..::::.v::.v.v::.::::::w:..vnv:::::::............
.......:'.. t}'::.:;:0.?/..r}. ..:�:}':nr::::.::::::::::.i':{:} ::: X.::::::w:.:j::::.�:.}v.w.:ii:.X.:::n}':: :?:.:J--::::Y :.r':::} is}..:..:}•. :L:::::::_�_::::v.::. .?::::::Y..�:..::'i:}'.:n.1:.v..::.::::}:: :i::i:4}
v}}}}:}}:??.:{,..: :::.�:::::: .:..::}}:4i}}: '.}}}}:,::...::::::::::::::.�•:.::.::::::.:::::i}}}}:: ::i:::ilii :isi:::iiii viiiiisv:::�::iii:fi::i::i::ii:}..?i}i::Y 1:}:::i:-iiiisi:....:iiiiiiiii::iiiiiiiti::i::ii:::j;-i::ii::i::i::ii::i:•::::•::i::ii
.f ^' s- :> ' �:ll .<:s: T�<#3�th' '::.; :. f ::::: I�:' :. :•:' : '`t�::d� <:
.'L•,Ra--�L:?::i��i�Y:f7�d :::�e:::�:L�:ti::�X�I{FNI:::.ti.�Fli+W.::: Ri� J:'. . ��:::��� '�{7i::�i �(47A'�::::�:v'#Xif '
.....................................................................................................................
Sti?{4}}}}%?y:.}::{:{::?::::::?::::::::v.v:.v:::::..::::::::.v::::::..:::::::::::::::::::.v::::::::::::.v::::::::nv::::::.:.::::::::.:..v:::v v:0}'?L::}:n}}:•:v::i':::::::.:....:::::::?:?i<?:v.:::.::•:...:}:-::i}}}}...:i'.::::::::.
..r:.:}}i..�.':.:..::..:....: :::i:::`.::..::......:..:..}...v......:..:..::v..:v.:...v:::{.vv..: :..giii;:.':•:�: :ii ... .:. .v...:}}..v r.........v?:: .r ?.: r, ..
.. ...........................
:::?'}i}:;"':i!'?i.}:::i:}:i:i;.;i y'i}:;Yi,}::}":::i':i:}:<:-:'::?::{.}:tii::i:•i}}}}}}"}i>;;ry}}}ii:Y"4}}}}}}}i'.}}}}X'4'+'}}}}}}}}}}}Y':�":•:^�?:•ti?.}}}}i}}}�:}}}}}}}N}}}}"}}i}i:'f"•::?•:}}}}::'.}::':4}:^i:?.}}}::•::":}}}}i::?Fi}i:-}}}}:
�::b�::. : �t ::�r.�th�tt€<:t��<.. .::�:• `'•��#tt�fit���:••' :- �tiri��: :.:..:�:••�><l�.i�t€Al �il:�i
>::i:}:::i:::;::-:}:...::::iii}:::;;:;:::i::i.:i.}:.:}:?;.;'.:i::::::i:;:::�ii::i:::<:::i:;:::>::i::::::•::ii::iiii:::isi:.i:}:}'.:::i:::i::i::isi::isi;:>:::<:>i::i'::}':;:::isi:>i:}::::<::�i':;:;:':'.::::::>i�::>:}:ii::>���::>�:>�::>:'i<:::::-:�':;:;::::><:::::>�i»::i>:�:<.:>'>::<i::,:i:>::i�;:>:i::>
3r1ud ::>bit:: oiited:>li>: ha e: ::tb<:ate:.:<:cuslor::: :> id::: ath:> tat n '
.............................::::::::.
4 ak sposai agreemenf�r other agreement € .:n zs om�r
August 30, 1994 -21- DRAFT
;...yY:K'.--:•: :yb:r.;..?:-}'i}�;}.n i.......:ri::.nM...:ry�..?. :.:: v.;::::-?.;:..:.... ..n%-:ix.4.}:;i.?:.. :}�J�:�1j��{� p}�
yes:> c��s��rc� e�:>> :.. �:� ..:��.:. �� �� >• .•..:.:...........
��:;. p�-�...::!:. -.:� ..7i1'T:::'. .�.;.....•::...••+.•::•'.•�.. �'YiLi.��':�Al:�'3:iii:3#ili:::��'eF:� .;.xT.i�:'}?:} .�'J.':'.-`',.::::.+.. .:::t
?;.,..;v:..v:}:::..::.:.h.;v-..;:::;;.:::...:::::::::n4:::.}:::::::•�:w._.,-.v.;v.;.........Y.;:�....•.,•;•S•,.:.•.O:in:.:.:}::.;.:::x:..::.:r:..v..;w..v::::_...;:.}i}::.w::::::::::w::::::w.:{::::ii::iLC:i::;v::..
;.:::.;._.••?v.:•i•}:4:n}};.::.}..::--•::v:.v::...v:::::::is nv:•.v w:::•:v:.v:.\nay;•.:::y...}i:;6:-::•}::..;.}:4i?}}ii:?L}:ib}:4}:4?iT:h:iti^}`}}:4}}}:'.-i?::.;;..;w::-:::.:::::nv:::::-w::.....:....:w:..:v::?:i i:rii?:
.,�� } :` .... .:ice....... .#��;9:..�.:.: ..�.................. .
ARTICLE 7. PERSONNEL
Operator shall assign qualified personnel to operate the site as may be required to
assure a smooth and efficient operation in compliance with all applicable Permits.
The County has the right to request, in writing, administrative action, including the
removal of any employee of Operator who violates any provision of this Agreement, or who
in the opinion of such requesting party is unsafe, negligent, or discourteous to the public or
others in the performance of his/her duties. Upon receipt of such a request, Operator shall
immediately take whatever administrative action, which, in its judgment, is necessary to
resolve the situation. Such action may include removal of that employee from the Site.
A Site Supervisor employed by Operator shall be present at the Site at all times that
any operations are being conducted thereon.
Operator shall file with the Director the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of
the Operator representatives who can be contacted at any time in case of emergency. These
representatives shall be fully authorized to respond so as to resolve the emergency.
ARTICLE 8. LANDFILL GAS
If at any time Operator voluntarily pursues the sale of gas produced from the Landfill
or the sale of electricity produced by burning said gas, County may require the payment of a
August 30, 1994 -22- DRAFT
Surcharge thereon.
ARTICLE 9, CLOSURE AND POST CLOSURE
Section 9.1 CLOSURE RESPONSIBILITIES. Operator shall be responsible for Site
Closure and Post Closure Maintenance of the Landfill according to all Permits and
requirements of the Regulatory Agencies. Operator will hold the County harmless for the
performance of its duties under this Article.
The County and Operator recognize the inevitability of Site Closure. Both parties
also recognize the existing uncertainties yet to be resolved which may impact the date and
total cost of Site Closure and the need to commence closure activities promptly upon
cessation of disposal activities in a discrete portion or phase of the Landfill.
The parties intend to provide for the public interest by assuring that the appropriate
financial mechanisms are put in place by Operator to provide funds to pay the costs incurred
for Site Closure and Post-Closure maintenance as required by law.
Section 9.2 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES. Operator shall provide all financial
assurances necessary to satisfy the provisions of Public Resources Code Section (formerly
Section 66796.22 of the California Government Code), Title 14, California Code of
Regulations, Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 3.5 and all other applicable provisions of
California and Federal law. The financial assurances shall include the establishment of a
trust fund or equivalent financial arrangement as evidence of financial ability to provide for
the cost of closure and post-closure maintenance as required by law. Operator shall consult
with the County with respect to proposals to be made to the State regarding the financial
assurance to be provided. Operator shall provide the County with adequate notice of any
August 30, 1994 -23- DRAFT
filings with the State or hearings with respect to such proposals sufficient to allow the
County to participate in and provide input to the State on the State's determinations on
closure and post closure requirements, including financial assurances to be imposed on the
Site.
Section 9.3 PERFORMANCE. Operator acknowledges that under State and Federal
law, Operator shall have the responsibility to perform both closure and post closure activities
in a timely, cost-effective manner. Performance by Operator shall be determined in
accordance with State and Federal statutes.
The County and Operator agree that, to the extent site closure and postclosure
activities are funded from the Landfill rates, it is in the local public interest to assure timely,
cost-effective closure and postclosure activities. The County shall have the right to conduct
such technical and financial review as it deems necessary to protect the local public interest.
Section 9.4 SIGNING OF INSTRUMENTS AND DOCUMENTS. From time to
time, either party shall at the request of the other party and without further consideration,
execute and deliver such instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary in order
to effectuate the purposes of this Article 9.
Section 9.5 FAILURE TO MEET CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE
OBLIGATIONS. In the event that Operator fails to perform its obligations as set forth in
this Article 9, or to enter upon performance of same with due diligence after the
determination of an event of default in a manner described below in Article 11, the County
may enter the Landfill and perform the Site Closure and Post-Closure activities required to
remedy the default and expend Site Closure funds for the costs involved.
August 30, 1994 -24- DRAFT
ARTICLE 10. UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION
Section 10.1 ASSURANCE OF UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION. Operator, in
entering into this Agreement, assures that it will provide from the Commencement Date for
the operation of a Solid Waste disposal facility at the Landfill in an uninterrupted manner for
as long as the Site is useful and usable, except as provided in Section 11.4 below. Operator
acknowledges the hardship that would occur if the Landfill is not operated properly or is
prematurely closed. The County and Operator recognize that in the ordinary course of
events, certain unexpected events may result that may place a burden on the requirement of
uninterrupted operation. However, it is the purpose of this Article 10 to establish that it is
Operator's obligation to avoid any interruption of operations except for those that are outside
of Operator's control, as provided by Section 11.5 of this Agreement.
Section 10.2 LABOR DISPUTES. In the event of a labor dispute, Operator shall use
its best efforts to keep the Landfill open and to operate it in accordance with this Agreement
unless a mutually acceptable disposal alternative is agreed upon by Operator.and the County.
ARTICLE 11. DEFAULT, REMEDIES
Because of the complex nature of this Agreement and the work to be performed
hereunder, together with the need for close cooperation and coordination between the parties,
it is not anticipated that either party will declare the other in default under the terms and
conditions of this Agreement except as a last resort. However, in the event of any such
necessity, the following provisions are made a part hereof.
Section 11.1 FAILURE TO PROSECUTE WORK. Should Operator fail to
prosecute the work or any severable part thereof in conformity with the requirements of this
August 30, 1994 -25- DRAFT
Agreement, the Director shall provide written notice to Operator specifying in detail the
defect or default in performance (the "First Notice") and Operator shall have the right to
cure same within a reasonable period of time.
If after the First Notice is provided to Operator, the work is not performed in
accordance with the Director's specified time frame and a reasonable time to cure so as to
ensure its completion in accordance with this Agreement, the Director shall serve further
notice (the "Second Notice") upon Operator of the County's intention to take further action
as provided by law. The Director shall make appropriate and detailed written findings of
fact which specify the event of default.
No earlier than thirty (30) days after the Second Notice, County shall have the power
and ability, if Operator is still in default, to take such actions as provided in law for
remedying the same, including the termination of this Agreement.
Should the County fail to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement,
Operator may declare the County in default after following the same two notice and findings
provisions required of the County above. Thereafter, Operator shall have the power and
ability, if the County is still in default, to take such actions as provided in law for remedying
the same, including bringing suit in a court of appropriate jurisdiction for equitable or legal
relief or both.
The foregoing notwithstanding, neither party may bring an action seeking money
damages unless it has first provided the other party with 30 days notice of its intention to do
so together with written notification of the specific actions which the other party may take to
remedy the default which will form the basis for the claim for monetary damages. If the
August 30, 1994 -26- DRAFT
other party in good faith commences the actions specified within the thirty (30) day period,
the first party shall not bring the action for damages.
Section 11.2 CONVICTION OF CERTAIN CRIMES. Operator agrees that a single
conviction of Operator, its parent, subsidiaries or operators, or their officers or employees at
the level of Site operations manager or above, acting within the scope of their employment,
of bribery, antitrust, corruption or theft relating to or involving directly the Landfill Site
shall constitute an event of a breach of this Agreement subject thereupon to the provisions of
this Article unless Operator, promptly initiates and follows through with appropriate
disciplinary procedures and action considering the nature of the offense and resolution by the
courts.
Section 11.3 CONDEMNATION. In addition to any other remedy available to the
County, it has the right and authority under law to condemn the Site.
Section 11.4 RIGHT TO TAKE/RIGHT TO POSSESSION. In the event that
Operator chooses to no longer operate the Site, Operator agrees that it will give County
notice of its intention to cease operation ninety (90) days prior to the cessation. If, after
receiving such notice, County initiates eminent domain proceedings to acquire the Site,
Operator agrees that it will not object to or contest County's right to take, or right of
possession of, the Site. Nothing contained herein shall constitute a waiver of the right to
contest valuation at any stage of the proceedings. County and Operator agree that the
provisions of this paragraph may be enforced by means of the remedy of specific
performance.
Section 11.5 FORCE MAJEURE. Operator shall not be liable for a default if the
August 30, 1994 -27- DRAFT
t
failure to perform under the terms and conditions of the Agreement arise out of causes
beyond the control or without the fault or negligence of Operator. Such causes may include,
but are not limited to, acts of God, or the public enemy, acts of the County in either its
sovereign or contractual capacity, fires, floods, earthquakes, epidemics, quarantine
restrictions, suppliers' and vendors' strikes and all other labor disputes, freight embargoes,
and unusually severe weather; but in every case the failure to perform must be beyond the
control and without substantialdefault or negligence of Operator. Operator shall make every
reasonable effort to mitigate the effects of said causes.
. Section 11.6 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. Notwithstanding any other available
remedies, the obligations duties and rights of each party under this Agreement shall be
specifically enforceable by the other party.
Section 11.7 NONEXCLUSIVE REMEDIES. The rights and remedies of either
party to this Agreement as provided for in this Article 11 shall not be exclusive, and are in
addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement; except
that the right of either party to seek monetary damages is limited as provided in Section 11.1
above.
ARTICLE 12. INSURANCE AND BONDS
Section 12.1 WORKERS' COMPENSATION. Operator hereby acknowledges that it
is aware of the provisions regarding Workers' Compensation, Section 3700 of the Labor
Code. Operator shall comply with the provisions of such Section as amended from time to
time with regard to its employees and shall supply to the County forthwith upon execution of
this Agreement, and annually thereafter, evidence of such compliance.
August 30, 1994 -28- DRAFT
Section 12.2 PUBLIC LIABILITY. If a willing company can be located by either
party hereto, and the premium for the policy or policies required hereunder is reasonable in
the opinion of County, Operator shall obtain from a good and responsible company or
companies doing insurance business in the State of California, and pay for, maintain in full
force and effect for the duration of this Agreement and any extension, a policy or
replacement policy of comprehensive liability insurance for the Landfill, in which the County
is named as an additional insured with Operator. Operator shall furnish a Certificate of
Liability Insurance to the Director before execution of this Agreement by the County.
Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy described by the Certificate of
Liability Insurance or any subsequent endorsement attached thereto, the protection offered by
the policy shall:
(a) Include the County, its officers, employees and agents while acting within
the scope of their duties under this Agreement, the Use Permit, or any other County
ordinance, resolution or other rule relating to the operation, maintenance or closure of the
Landfill, as an additional insured covering said duties against all third party claims for
negligence; and for indemnification of the County as provided by this Agreement.
(b) Provide for a combined single limit policy not less than $10,000,000 per
occurrence, combined bodily injury and property damage; such policy may exclude liability
for bodily injury and property damage caused by toxic wastes. At every fifth year of this
Agreement, this $10,000,000 minimum limit shall be increased as directed by the County but
not more than 30% for each such five year period.
Section 12.3 OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS. All insurance policies required
August 30, 1994 -29- DRAFT
by this Agreement shall bear an endorsement, whereby it is provided that, in the event of
expiration, or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever, the Director
shall be notified in writing not less than thirty (30) days before expiration or cancellation is
effective.
Expiration, reduction or cancellation of any insurance policy required by this
Agreement without obtaining a replacement policy pursuant to Section 12.2 to meet the
requirements herein shall be considered a breach of this Agreement by Operator.
Operator shall also carry such other insurance as may be required by law. Operator
shall be solely liable for any claims or liabilities caused by its failure to maintain insurance
required by law.
Section 12.4 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SURETY. Operator shall, prior to
acceptance of waste at the Site under this Agreement, provide to the County an irrevocable
Performance Surety Letter of Credit in the form set forth in Exhibit B hereto guaranteeing
Operator's performance of all provisions of this Agreement (except Article 9, relating to Site
Closure, for which separate financial assurances are required by applicable law) in an amount
of not less than $1,000,000.00. This Letter of Credit may also be utilized to meet the
security and performance requirement of the Use Permit, except as to the closure
requirements which will be separately secured. If Operator or an affiliate acceptable to the
Director operates a transfer or processing station in the County, from which transfer or
processing station solid waste is delivered to the Landfill, the Director may allow the
Performance Surety Letter of Credit required by this section to additionally guarantee
Operator's performance of all provisions of said transfer station agreement or franchise.
August 30, 1994 -30- DRAFT
r '
ARTICLE 13, GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 13.1 GUARANTY BY PARENT OR AFFILIATE. Prior to the
Commencement Date, and for all conditions and obligations of this Agreement, Operator
shall provide to the Director, proof of guaranty by the parent or an affiliate of Operator
acceptable to the County, of the performance by Operator of each provision of this
Agreement to be performed by Operator. Proof of guaranty shall be in the form set forth in
Exhibit C.
Section 13.2 ATTORNEY'S FEES. In the event of litigation between the parties
arising hereunder, each party shall pay and bear its own litigation expenses, including
attorney's fees.
Section 13.3 INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT.
(a) All work and performances by Operator covered by this Agreement shall
be at the risk of Operator
(b) With respect to third-party claims, Operator agrees to save, indemnify and
keep harmless the County, its officers, employees, agents and assign against any and all
liability, claims, judgments, or demands, including demands arising from injuries or deaths
of persons and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein
undertaken by Operator, save and except claims or litigation arising through the sole
negligence or willful misconduct of the County, and will make good to and reimburse the
County for any expenditures, including reasonable attorney's fees, that the County may make
by reason of such matters and, if requested by the County, shall defend any such suit at the
sole cost and expense of Operator.
August 30, 1994 -31- DRAFT
(c) With respect to third-party claims, the County agrees to save, indemnify
and keep harmless Operator, its officers, employees, agents and assigns against any and all
liability, claims, judgments, or demands, including demands arising from injuries or deaths
of persons and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the sole negligence or
willful misconduct of the County, and will make,good to and reimburse Operator for any
expenditures, including reasonable attorney's fees, that Operator may make by reason of such
matters and, if requested by Operator, shall defend any such suit at the sole cost and expense
of the County.
(d) Should any party successfully challenge the validity of this Agreement or
the procedure by which this Agreement was entered into or the validity of any County action
which authorizes the County to enter into this Agreement, then in such case the Operator
shall have no cause of action for damages or any other relief against County as a result of
such successful challenge. In the event of any such legal challenge, Operator shall defend
such action or proceeding at its sole expense and Operator shall save and hold County
harmless from any claims or awards for third party attorneys' fees and costs.
Section 13.4 ASSIGNMENT.
(a) VolunIM. Operator shall not sell, assign, subcontract or transfer this Agreement
or any part hereof, or any obligation hereunder, without the written consent of County;
provided, however, that Operator may assign this Agreement without the County's consent to
any company which it controls, is controlled by, or which is under common control with
Operator. As used in this Section, the term "control" with respect to a company, means the
beneficial ownership of more than 50% of the voting stock of the company.
August 30, 1994 -32- DRAFT
The term assignment shall include any dissolution, merger, consolidation or other
reorganization of Operator, which results in change of control of Operator, or any sale or
other transfer of a controlling percentage of Operator's capital stock. Any attempted
assignment not provided for above without such consent shall be void ab initio.
(b) Involuntary. Except as may be permitted by paragraph (a) above, no interest of
Operator in this Agreement shall be assignable by operation of law. Any such nonpermitted
assignment and any of the following acts, each of which are deemed an involuntary
assignment, shall provide County with the right to elect to terminate the Agreement
forthwith, without suit or other proceeding:
(1) If Operator becomes insolvent, or makes an assignment for the benefit of
creditors;
(2) If Writ of Attachment or Execution is levied on this Agreement or other
property of Operator such that would have a materially adverse effect on Operator's ability to
perform its duties and obligations under this Agreement;
(3) If in any proceeding to which Operator is a party, a Receiver is appointed
with authority to take possession of Operator's property such that would have a materially
adverse effect on Operator's ability to perform its duties and obligations under this
Agreement.
Section 13.5 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. No verbal agreement with any officer,
agency, or employee of the, County or of Operator nor any contract either before, during, or
after the execution of this agreement shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations
herein contained unless a written agreement, signed by both parties, specifically provides that
August 30, 1994 -33- DRAFT
same is an amendment to this Agreement.
Section 13.6 NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY ENFORCEMENT. While this
contract benefits the public interest throughout Contra Costa County, it is an Agreement
between only Operator and the County and, accordingly, only Operator and the County may
enforce same. No claims, demands, or causes of action by any entity, party, or person
claiming to be a third party beneficiary hereunder shall be enforceable.
Section 13.7 ARBITRATION. Any controversy or claim submitted to arbitration
pursuant to the express provisions of this Agreement, or by mutual subsequent agreement,
and arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, shall be governed by
the provisions of Part III., Title 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, sections 1280 et seq. as
amended from time to time. The arbitration shall be de novo and subject to a de novo appeal
or challenge brought in the Contra Costa County Superior Court as to any alleged error of
law or as to the admissibility of evidence. California judicial rules of evidence shall apply to
the arbitration proceedings. The arbitration decision shall be decided under and in
accordance with California law, supported by a preponderance of evidence and in writing in
the form of a Statement of Decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 632.
Section 13.8 CONFLICT.
(a) This Agreement is intended to implement prior Landfill approvals,
including the Use Permit (and Ordinance No. 88-81 if applicable to the Landfill). In the
case of any apparent or potential conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and the
provisions of the Use Permit or any involved development agreement, the provisions of this
Agreement, the Use Permit and/or development agreement shall be read together and
August 30, 1994 -34- DRAFT
1 `
harmonized to the maximum extent possible to effectuate the intentions of the parties. In the
case of any unresolved conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and the provisions
of the Use Permit or any involved development agreement, the provisions of the Use Permit
and/or development agreement shall control. Notwithstanding any other provision in this
Agreement or in the Use Permit, importation of waste not originating in Contra Costa
County shall be allowed as required by recent U.S. Supreme Court cases.
(b) Operator has entered into an agreement with Contra Costa Water District
("CCWD") the relevant portions of which are attached hereto as Exhibit D, which Exhibit is
incorporated herein by this reference. If there is any conflict between this Agreement and
Exhibit D, this Agreement shall prevail with respect to the relationship between Operator and
the County.
Section 13.9 CAPTIONS. The captions and headings used in this Agreement are for
convenience and reference only and are not to be construed as controlling over the text of
this Agreement.
Section 13.10 DELEGATION BY BOARD. The Board may, in its discretion,
delegate to a County employee or hearing officer any of its functions expressly or impliedly
arising from this Agreement provided that in such case any decision made by such Board,
County employee or officer may be appealed de novo to the Board.
Section 13.11 SEVERABILITY. If any term, provision, covenant or condition
("provision") of the Agreement or the application of any provision of this Agreement to a
particular situation is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement, or the application of this
August 30, 1994 -35- DRAFT
i
Agreement to other situations, shall continue in full force and effect. Notwithstanding any
other provision of this Agreement, if any provision of this Agreement in itself or as applied
in any particular situation is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable, it is the intention of
the parties that the remaining portions of this Agreement shall be continued in full force and
effect and that the invalid, void or unenforceable provision be severed therefrom.
Section 13.12 MASCULINE GENDER USED. The masculine gender is sometimes
used in this Agreement and is so used for convenience only and is not otherwise intended.
Section 13.13 GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
Section 13.14 NOTICES. All notices or other communications ("Notice") to be
given pursuant to this Agreement, including the notices required in Articles 6 and 10 hereof,
shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when mailed by registered or certified United
States mail, addressed to the parties as follows:
To County: County of Contra Costa
Attn: County Administrator
To Operator: Keller Canyon Landfill Company
Attn: Boyd M. Olney, Jr.
441 North Buchanan Circle
Pacheco, California 94553
With Courtesy as designated by Browning-Ferris Industries of California.
A change in address or a change in the person or title to which Notice is to be given
shall be effectuated by Notice to the other party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is effective on the date first provided on
page one hereof.
August 30, 1994 -36- DRAFT
• `n
1
OPERATOR
Keller Canyon Landfill Company
a California corporation
By:
Boyd M. Olney, Jr.
President
By:
Vice-President
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
By:
Chair, Board of Supervisors
ATTEST: By:
Clerk of the Board
APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:
bf: 12.ee,a3o.44 County Counsel
August 30, 1994 -37- DRAFT
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA AND BFIC, INC.
FOR THE
ACME FILL WASTE RECOVERY AND TRANSFER STATION
Dated: September , 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS - ACME WASTE RECOVERY AND TRANSFER STATION
RECITALS 1
ARTICLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS 2
Section 1.1 RECITALS INCORPORATION. . . . . . . . . . . 2
Section 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE, EFFECT. . . . . . . . . . . 2
Section 1.3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. . . . . . . . . 2
Section 1.4 OPERATOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT. . . . . . . . . . 3
Section 1.5 COUNTY DISCRETION AND INTEREST. . . . . 4
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS 4
Section 2.1 AGREEMENT. , 4
Section 2.2 ACTIVITIES REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Section 2.3 ANALYSIS PERIOD. . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section 2.4 COUNTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section 2.5 DIRECTOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section 2.6 EMERGENCY. . . 5
Section 2.7 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . 5
Section 2.8 GATE RATE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.9 HOURS OF OPERATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2. 10 HOURS OF ACCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2. 11 KELLER LANDFILL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2.12 MANDATED FEES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Section 2. 13 OPERATOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.14 PERMITS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.15 REGULATORY AGENCIES. . . . . . . 7
Section 2. 16 SCHEDULE OF CHARGES. . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2.17 SOLID WASTE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 2. 18 SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . . . 9
Section 2. 19 SURCHARGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Section 2.20 SURCHARGE PAYMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Section 2.21 TRANSFER STATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Section 2.22 TRANSFER STATION PROPRIETARY RATE. . . . . 9
Section 2.23 USE PERMIT. 10
ARTICLE 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT 10
ARTICLE 4. PERFORMANCE OF OPERATOR 10
Section 4.1 OPERATION OF TRANSFER STATION. . . . . . . 10
Section 4.2 UNACCEPTABLE WASTE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Section 4.3 INSPECTION, INVESTIGATION, AND EVALUATION
OF SITE. 11
Section 4.4 PERMITS. . . . . 12
Section 4.5 STATUS OF TITLE. ... . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Section 4. 6 GATE FACILITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Section 4.7 OPERATION OF GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. 13
Section 4 .8 FEE COLLECTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Section 4.9. PAYMENT TO COUNTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
August 30, 1994 -i- DRAFT
t.
Section 4.10 HOURS OF ACCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Section 4.11 NONDISCRIMINATORY SERVICE. . . . 14
Section 4.12 ACCESS ROADS, .HAUL ROADS AND SERVICE
ROADS. 14
Section 4.13 LITTER MANAGEMENT. . . . .. . . . . . . . 15
Section 4.14 ENVIRONMENTAL.MITIGATION. . . . . 15
Section 4.15. RECYCLING/RESOURCE RECOVERY PROGRAMS.. . . . 15
Section 4.16 ACTIVITIES REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . 15 '
Section 4.17 PENALTY SCHEDULE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE. . . . 16
Section 4. 18 RECORDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 17
Section 4.19 HOST COMMUNITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
ARTICLE 5• PERFORMANCE OF COUNTY 17
Section 5.1 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . 17
Section 5.2 INSPECTION OF SCALES. . . . . . . . . . . . 17
ARTICLE 6. RATES 18
Section 6.1 BASWA RATE. . . . . . . . . 18
Section 6.2 SURC2G:E .::`.::`: .;::.. . . . . . . . . . . 19
Section 6.3 GATE RATE. . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . 19
Section 6.4 INITIAL SURCHARGE. • . • . . • • . . . 19
Section 6.5 CONTRACTS. . . . . . . . . . . 21
• }°
21
Imn'll
Yl:}:;;% i►.:.F:: i7L`.:: ;lSL.iS::� • • • • • • • • • • • • • 22
ARTICLE 7. PERSONNEL 23
ARTICLE 8• UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION 24
Section 8.1 ASSURANCE OF .UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION. • . • 24
Section 8.2 LABOR DISPUTES. o • • • . • . . . . 24
ARTICLE 9. DEFAULT, REMEDIES 24
Section 9. 1 FAILURE TO PROSECUTE WORK• . . • . • • 25
Section 9.2 CONVICTION OF CERTAIN CRIMES. . . . . . . . 26
Section 9.3 CONDEMNATION. . . • . • o o 26
Section 9.4 RIGHT TO TAKEJRIGHT TO POSSESSION. 27
Section 9.5 FORCE MAJEURE. . . . . • • . . . . . . . . 27
Section 9. 6 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. • . . . . . . . 28
Section 9.7 -NONEXCLUSIVE REMEDIES. . . . . • . . . 28
ARTICLE 10. INSURANCE AND BONDS 28
Section 10.1 WORKERS' COMPENSATION. . . . • . . • . . . 28
Section 10.2 PUBLIC LIABILITY. . . . . . . . • • . . . 28
Section 10.3 OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS. • . . . o 29
Section 10.4 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SURETY• . . • . . . . 30
ARTICLE 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS 30
Section 11.1 GUARANTY BY PARENT OR AFFILIATE. . . . . . 30
Section 11.2 ATTORNEY'S FEES. . . . . . . . • • 31
Section 11.3 INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT. . . 31
Section 11.4 ASSIGNMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
August 30, 1994 -ii- DRAFT
Section 11.5 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Section 11.6 NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY ENFORCEMENT. 34
Section 13.7 ARBITRATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Section 13.8 CONFLICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Section 11.9 CAPTIONS. . . . . . . . . 35
Section 11.10 DELEGATION BY BOARD. 35
Section 11.11 SEVERABILITY. . . . . . 36
Section 11. 12 MASCULINE GENDER USED. . . . . . . . 36
Section 11. 13 GOVERNING LAW. ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Section 11.14 NOTICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
August 30, 1994 -iii- DRAFT
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
FOR THE
ACME FILL WASTE RECOVERY AND TRANSFER. STATION
THIS FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACME WASTE RECOVERY AND
TRANSFER STATION (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this
by and between the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
(hereinafter "County") and BFIC, Inc. , a California Corporation
(hereinafter "Operator") .
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of California has
adopted the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989,
which assigns certain responsibilities for the County's solid
waste planning, management, program implementation, and
regulation to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors; and
WHEREAS, on 15 December 1987, the Board of Supervisors of
Contra Costa County approved Land Use Permit No. 2122-86 for the
Acme Fill Waste Recovery and Transfer Station ("Transfer
Station") subject to the applicable conditions of approval,
subject to subsequent amendments thereto by the Board of
Supervisors; and
WHEREAS, the County adopted Ordinance No. 88-81, which
provides that a solid waste facility may be operated within the
County only upon the approval of a franchise agreement by the
August 30, 1994 -1- DRAFT
County or upon the operator of a solid waste facility entering
into a contract with the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
to operate such facility; and
WHEREAS, Operator has requested that ,the County enter a
franchise Agreement with Operator pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-
81; and
WHEREAS, recent United States Supreme Court cases decided
under the Commerce Clause of -the United States Constitution
generally prohibiting states and their political subdivisions
from erecting barriers to the free flow of solid waste (and
thereby discriminating against interstate commerce) significantly
affects the solid waste industry, and affects the parties hereto;
NOW, THEREFORE, the County and Operator, for and in
consideration of the covenants and agreements as hereinafter set
forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, do mutually
agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
Section 1.1 RECITALS INCORPORATION. The Recitals set forth
above, and all defined terms set forth in such Recitals and in
the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby
incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full.
Section 1.2 EFFECTIVE DATE, EFFECT. This Agreement is
effective on the date mentioned in the first paragraph of page
one hereof.
Section 1.3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. Operator acknowledges
August 30, 1994 -2- DRAFT
r ,
and agrees that all of the terms and conditions of the Use
Permits Conditions of Approval and any amendments thereto, are
reasonable, legal and valid and that Operator is barred from any
action or proceeding or any defense of invalidity or
unreasonableness of said Conditions of Approval and any
amendments thereto, and related County decisions. Further,
Operator agrees during the period(s) that the Use Permit (and its
Conditions of Approval and any amendments thereto) or this
Agreement are in effect, Operator will not attack or otherwise
assail the reasonableness, legality or validity of any terms and
conditions of said documents, or of any provisions included in
this Agreement. The parties acknowledge that the agreement by
Operator in this section is a material consideration for County's
approval of this Agreement.
Section 1.4 OPERATOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT. Operator acknowledges
and agrees that this Agreement and the Use Permit (by the
incorporation herein of the Use Permit) provide for and allow,
among other things, funding for mitigation, provision of closure
and post-closure costs, payment to County of annual franchise
revenue fees, and otherwise payment to County and reimbursement
of County costs for its governmental administration of the
project entitlements.
It is understood that, among other things, this Agreement
provides for Operatorfs establishment of its proprietary rates to
enable Operator to compete in a solid waste disposal market that
has become highly competitive as a result of recent United States
August 30, 1994 -3- DRAFT
Supreme Court decisions.
Section 1.5 COUNTY DISCRETION AND INTEREST.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, Operator
acknowledges that County's discretion to grant, approve or deny
one or more nonexclusive or other franchises or similar
agreements for others is not limited or abridged in any manner by
this Agreement; and that this Agreement does not require the
approval of any such other franchises or agreements by Operator.
County reserves the rights as part of the negotiation and entry
of any such other franchise or agreement to enter a public-
private or public-public partnership with other owners and/or to
pursue any rights of the County to seek ownership of solid waste
facilities.
ARTICLE 2 . DEFINITIONS
Section 2.1 AGREEMENT. "Agreement" shall refer to this
Agreement and is synonymous for purposes of this Agreement with
the word "Contract10.
Section '2.2 ACTIVITIES REPORT. The "Activities Report" is
a summary document reporting Operator's activities and overall
performance during the preceding Analysis Period or over such
period of time as set by- the County. The Activities Report shall
summarize transfer station related activities as directed by
County and may include, but shall not be limited to: compliance
with the provisions of this Contract and all applicable Permits
and Regulatory Agency Requirements, complaints and corrective
actions taken,and any other matter the Board may reasonably
August 30, 1994 -4- DRAFT
- ' t
require for the proper administration of this Agreement,
including, but not limited to, .reports relating to resource
recovery goals and requirements in connection with the Integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989 or any other law, regulation, plan
or program.
Section 2.3 ANALYSIS PERIOD. "Analysis Period" refers to
the twelve (12) consecutive calendar months beginning the first
day of January of each year throughout the term of this
Agreement. The first Analysis Period, for the purposes of this
Agreement shall begin on the effective date of this Agreement and
shall continue to December 31, 1995.
Section 2.4 COUNTY. "County" shall mean the County of
Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State -of California.
Section 2.5 DIRECTOR. "Director" shall mean the County
Administrator or his designated deputy, other County officer or
employee.
Section 2.6 EMERGENCY. "Emergency" shall mean a sudden,
unexpected occurrence involving a clear and imminent -danger,
demanding immediate action to prevent or mitigate loss of, or
damage to, life, health, property, or essential public services.
Emergency includes such occurrences as fire, flood, earthquake,
or other soil or geologic movements, as well as such occurrences
as riots, accident and sabotage.
Section 2.7 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. The "Gate Fee
Collection System" shall consist of all equipment, hardware, and
software utilized for purposes of assessing, collecting, and
August 30, 1994 -5- DRAFT
accounting for Tipping Fees for the receipt of Solid Waste at the
Transfer Station.
Section 2.8 GATE RATE. "Gate Rate" shall mean the per ton
fee charged by Operator for Operator's receipt of Solid Waste at
the Transfer Station. The Gate Rate shall be the Transfer
Station Proprietary Rate plus Surcharge and Mandated Fees, if any
and disposal costs. "Gate Rate" shall be synonymous with
"Tipping Fee."
Section 2.9 HOURS OF OPERATION. "Hours of Operation" shall
be those times during which the use of heavy equipment and other
machinery necessary for operation of the Site in compliance with
the Use Permit, the Solid Waste Facilities Permit and this
Agreement will be allowed.
Section 2.10 HOURS OF ACCESS. "Hours of Access" shall be
those times during which Solid Waste may be delivered to and
received at the Transfer Station.
- Section 2.11 KELLER LANDFILL. "Keller Landfill" or
"Landfill" shall mean the Keller Canyon Landfill, approved and
operating pursuant to County Land Use Permit No. 2020-89, Solid
Waste Facilities Permit No. 07-AA-0032 and other County and other
governmental approvals as of the effective date of this
Agreement.
Section 2.12 MANDATED FEES. "Mandated Fees" shall be those
monies required from Operator from time to time by any Regulatory
Agency for the purpose of funding (a) Federal, State or regional
programs, (b) programs required by the Land Use Permit, or (c)
August 30, 1994 -6- DRAFT-
other County established fees.
Section 2.13 OPERATOR. "Operator" shall mean the holder of
, the Use Permit or its assignee.
Section 2.14 PERMITS. . "Permits" shall mean any and all
governmental approvals, entitlements, clearances or
classifications, including but not limited to, the Use Permit,
general plan amendments, environmental impact reports, zoning
approvals, conditional use permits, waste discharge permits and
requirements, facilities permits, permits to operate, permits to
construct, closure plans, building permits, encroachment permits,
grading permits, tree removal permits, tract/parcel maps and all
other governmental -permits, consents or approvals as may be
necessary to allow Operator to construct and operate the Transfer
Station.
Section 2.15 REGULATORY AGENCIES. "Regulatory Agencies"
shall mean Federal, State and local agencies responsible for
regulating the operation and maintenance of transfer stations or
sanitary landfills, such as., but not limited to, California
Integrated Waste Management Board, California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, California Department of Health Services,
the Contra Costa County Department of Health Services as Local
Enforcement Agency for handling and disposal of Solid -Waste, the
Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the County.
Section 2.16 SCHEDULE OF CHARGES. The "Schedule of
Charges" shall mean a comprehensive list of Tipping Fees charged
at the Transfer Station.
August 30, 1994 -7- DRAFT
Section 2.17 SOLID WASTE. "Solid Waste," "solid waste" or
"waste" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 40191 of the
California Public Resources Code as it may be amended from time
to time, as. follows:
"40191(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b) ,
'solid waste' means all putrescible and nonputrsecible
solid, semisolid, and liquid wastes, .including garbage,
trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial
wastes, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned
vehicles and parts thereof, discarded home and
industrial appliances, dewatered, treated, or
chemically fixed sewage sludge which is not hazardous
waste, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semisolid
wastes, and other discarded solid and semisolid
wastes.
" (b) 'Solid wastes" does not include hazardous waste
or low-level radioactive waste regulated under Chapter
7.6 (commencing with Section 25800) of Division 20 of
the Health and Safety Code.
11 (c) 'Solid Waste' does not include medical waste
which is regulated pursuant to the Medical Waste
Management Act (Chapter) 6.1 (commencing with Section
25015) of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code) .
Untreated medical waste shall not be disposed of in a
solid waste landfill, as defined in Section 46027.
Medical waste which has been treated and which is
August 30, 1994 -8- DRAFT
deemed to be solid waste -shall be regulated pursuant to
this division. "
Section 2.18, SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS. . ."Solid Waste. Programs"
shall mean those programs directly related to solid waste which
may include: transfer stations, household hazardous waste
programs, recycling and resource recovery programs, Agreement and
Use Permit administration costs (including legal, engineering,
and accounting and other costs of the County) .
Section 2.19 SURCHARGE. "Surcharge" shall mean a special
charge as required by the County and this Agreement, for funding
of Solid Waste Programs, closure of landfills in operation prior
to 1990 and for franchise fees and other costs as deemed
appropriate by the County.
Section 2.20 SURCHARGE PAYMENTS. "Surcharge Payments"
shall mean those monies received by Operator as a Surcharge and
remitted to the County in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement and of the Permits.
Section 2 .21 TRANSFER STATION. "Transfer Station" or
"Site" shall mean the Acme Fill Waste Recovery and Transfer
Station, commonly referred to as the "Acme Permanent Transfer
Station, " the operation of which is approved and authorized by,
and subject to, County Land Use Permit No. 2122-86, as amended,
this Agreement, Solid Waste Facilities Permit No. 07-AA-0027, and
other County and other .regulatory agency requirements as of the
effective date of this Agreement.
August 30, 1994 -9- DRAFT
I
Section 2.22 TRANSFER .STATION PROPRIETARY RATE. "Transfer
Station Proprietary Ratel' shall mean the proprietary fees charged
by Operator for the receipt and acceptance of Solid Waste at the
Transfer Station. -
Section 2.23 USE PERMIT. "Use Permit" -shall mean Contra
Costa County Land Use Permit No. 2122-86,- together with all
Conditions of Approval applicable thereto, including any
amendments thereof.
ARTICLE 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT
The term ef this Agreement shall be 25 years frem the
e€€eetive-date of this Agreement, subjeet te-renewal €er an
adi-trenal-25 year term, provided the Aperater is in substantial-
eeapllan.ee with the terms e -this-Agreement, the Permits and
...............
other appieab-le-lie 3- -ements of Regu atery Agene a S„1h >
•'M:n;hof-,f.^tttt<4'AC!VC}JC^:t N.!f'tt•}f"':::n:+- }};S^:tt t' 'C:'^i}:.v::{::it•.:i}iv{:n}:t'-}}i}i}::::t•i nfi tvii}:':.
� �. .:: :...:.:::�-.:w. ...z:.:.:...::..................................:......... ;:.tit>. :.:x.::::::::::::> .:}}.::::....::..:.::::::.
ARTICLE 4. PERFORMANCE OF OPERATOR
Section 4.1 OPERATION OF TRANSFER STATION. Operator shall
operate the Transfer Station for the receipt, processing and
transfer of Solid Waste in strict compliance with, and subject
to, the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Permits and
other applicable requirements of Regulatory Agencies.
Section 4.2 UNACCEPTABLE WASTE. Operator shall not allow
the receipt of material other than Solid Waste at the Transfer
Station unless specially approved in writing by the Director and
otherwise allowed by law. It is recognized that some non-
approved materials, including hazardous wastes, may occasionally
August 30, 1994 -10- DRAFT
be unloaded at the Transfer Station by users thereof. Operator
shall train -its on-site employees to recognize such unacceptable
wastes and materials. In the event that unacceptable waste is
deposited at the Transfer Station, it shall be handled and
removed by Operator in accordance with procedures which shall be
developed by Operator and submitted to the County for approval
prior to any receipt of Solid Waste at the Transfer Station.
Nothing herein is intended to .relieve the person or persons
depositing or causing to be deposited such unacceptable waste
from any liability. Operator retains the right to use all legal
means to recover costs of removal and alternate disposal or
treatment from such person or persons.
Section 4.3 INSPECTION, INVESTIGATION, AND EVALUATION OF
SITE. The Site shall be immediately accessible at all reasonable
times to Regulatory Agency officials for any reasonable, lawful
and proper purpose. County officials shall usually give
reasonable notice to Operator of their intention to visit the
Site or if such notice is not given, shall notify operator's on-
site personnel of their presence on the Site.
County shall not incur liability arising from the discharge
of its inspection responsibilities, either by commission or by
omission, except for its tortious conduct or breach of duty
resulting in death, injury or property damage while engaged in
its inspection responsibilities. The inspection. of the work
shall not relieve Operator of any obligation to perform under
this Agreement. Operator shall remove and replace or repair any
August 30, 1994 -11- DRAFT
work not in compliance with those Permits, laws, ordinances or
regulations applicable to the Site.
Section 4.4 PERMITS. Operator shall obtain and maintain in
force all necessary. Permits and/or other approvals from the
Regulatory Agencies for the Transfer Station.
Upon receipt of each such Permit or approval, a copy
thereof, together with all conditions or requirements attached
thereto, shall be delivered by Operator to the Director.
Section 4.5 STATUS OF TITLE. Operator shall provide to the
County reasonable evidence sufficient to establish that Operator
is in possession of and/or has the right to Operate the, Transfer
Station.
Section 4.6 GATE FACILITIES. Operator shall supply,
construct and thereafter maintain gate fee collection facilities.
The facilities shall be designed and located as necessary so as
to expedite the fee transactions and shall be attractively
finished. The facilities shall be consistent with the Use Permit
for the Site.
Operator shall supply, construct, and maintain truck scales
as necessary to expedite the fee transactions, prevent traffic
back-up, and allow for occasional maintenance and repair. The
scales shall be compatible with the Gate Fee Collection System
approved by the County, in accordance with Section 5.1 of this
Agreement.
The scales shall be open and in working order during all
Hours of Access. All waste disposal vehicles shall be recorded
August 30, 1994 -12- DRAFT
by the Gate Fee Collection System.
Operator shall make provisions for quick repairs of the
scales by competent technicians to minimize downtime. The scales
shall meet all State requirements for design approval and
accuracy for State certified scales. Only those scales
functioning in accordance with all applicable regulations shall
be used. Operator shall obtain the State of California
certification for scale accuracy.
Operator shall supply, deliver and maintain utilities to the
Transfer Station and shall be responsible for all on-site and
off-site costs and service charges in connection therewith.
Section 4.7 OPERATION OF GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM.
Operator shall provide and operate the Gate Fee Collection
System, including the providing of all labor and materials
necessary with respect thereto. Such operation shall be for all
Hours of Access. .
Section 4.8 FEE COLLECTION. Operator shall collect, count
and account for all Tipping Fees and waste quantities from each
customer or user- of the Transfer Station. Said fees shall be
collected in accordance with all applicable requirements,
including Article 6. In the event that no scale is operable at
any given time, vehicles will be charged based upon a flat fee or
volume fee schedule established by the parties or by Operator in
advance.
Operator shall furnish the County with monthly reports on
the number and types of vehicles and waste tonnages and/or
August 30, 1994 -13- DRAFT
volumes, as appropriate, of the various types and Gate revenue.
Section 4.9. PAYMENT TO COUNTY. Operator shall pay the
Surcharge Payments required and received in accordance with
Article 6 to the County monthly in arrears. Operator shall pay
the Surcharge Payments to County within thirty (30) calendar days
after the close of the prior month in which they are collected.
Section 4.10 HOURS OF ACCESS. Unless otherwise required by
the terms of other Permits, Hours of Access shall be those
specified in the Solid Waste Facilities Permit. Should the
Director declare that an Emergency exists, Operator shall. keep
the Transfer Station open as instructed to allow for the orderly
receipt, processing and transfer of Solid Waste generated or
created by such emergency conditions at no additional charge or
increase in the Gate Rate. The scheduled Hours of Access may be
changed in a manner consistent with permit requirements..
Operator may, in its sole discretion, observe the following
holidays and close the Transfer Station: New Year's Day, Easter
Sunday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving
Day and Christmas Day, or other major holiday as approved by the
Director.
Section '4.11 NONDISCRIMINATORY SERVICE. Operator shall
provide nondiscriminatory service for Solid Waste receipt,
processing and transfer to all users, and shall abide by all
Federal, State and local laws and the Land Use Permit.
Section 4.12 ACCESS ROADS, HAUL ROADS AND SERVICE ROADS.
It shall be Operator's responsibility to provide and maintain all
August 30, 1994 -14- DRAFT
roads required in connection with the operation of the Transfer
Station. Haul roads shall be well maintained. The surface
shall be reasonably free from potholes and depressions.
Section 4.13 LITTER MANAGEMENT. Operator.-. shall maintain.. .
and keep the Transfer Station and its access road reasonably free
of litter and other refuse. Operator shall be solely responsible
for maintaining the Site in a clean and sanitary condition, and
shall be responsible for any public nuisance .created. as a result
of its operations.
Operator shall control on-site and off-site litter or debris
in accordance with the Use Permit and the Solid Waste Facilities
Permit.
Section 4.14 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION. Operator shall
comply with all environmental mitigation measures reasonably and
lawfully imposed by Regulatory Agencies including those imposed
by the Use Permit.
Section 4.15 RECYCLINGJRESOURCE RECOVERY PROGRAMS.
Operator shall cooperate with the County and reasonably
participate in waste reduction programs of the County, including
participation in a County sponsored recycling/resource recovery
plan and litter program, implementation of programs in
conformance with any County recycling or resource recovery
program, plan or element, and/or any other activity which the
County deems is appropriate for inclusion in the County Solid
Waste Programs.
Section 4. 16 ACTIVITIES REPORT. Operator shall, by the
August 30, 1994 -15- DRAFT
first day of January of each year, assemble and provide to the
County the Activities Report for the. most recent Analysis Period...
The Board may direct, upon ninety (90) days' written notice to
Operator, that the report provided in the Activities. Report be
made semi-annually.
Section 4.17 PENALTY SCHEDULE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE. In the
event that noncompliance by Operator with any condition or
provision of this Agreement,. or any applicable Permits or •
Regulatory Agency requirements is determined by the County,
County shall notify Operator of the identified noncompliance.
Following notification of noncompliance, the Director may
impose penalties per noncompliance upon three (3) days notice to
Operator in accordance with the following penalty schedule until
such time as compliance is achieved:
$ 500. 00 per day during the first week of noncompliance
$ 750.00 per day during the second week of noncompliance
$1,000.00 per day during the third week of noncompliance
$1,250.00 per day for each day thereafter.
At the time the Director imposes any penalties, the amounts
due for each day of noncompliance •shall be the above amounts
subject to annual CPI adjustments, the applicable index to be
reasonably selected by the Director.
Notwithstanding the above three paragraphs, no monetary
penalties will be imposed by the County in the event that
August 30, 1994 -16- DRAFT
Operator and/or said Regulatory Agency are diligently pursuing
the process of correction .or mitigation of the event(s) causing
noncompliance.
Operator shall have the right..to arbitrate any action taken
by the County under this provision in accordance with Section
11.7 of this Agreement.
Section 4.18 RECORDS. Operator shall keep separate and
accurate records for the Transfer Station as reasonablydirected
by County for purposes of administering this Agreement.
The County may, at its own expense (which may be recovered
as a Solid Waste program cost) , at any time during the term of
this Agreement, have the books and records of the Operator
examined for the sole purpose -of verifying Operator's compliance
with the requirements of this Agreement. County shall give
thirty (30) days' written notice to the Operator in advance of
such examination date.
Section 4.19 HOST COMMUNITY. Operator shall collect and
remit to the County, a host community mitigation fee in the
amount of as part of the Surcharge on all solid waste
delivered to the Transfer Station.
ARTICLE 5. - PERFORMANCE OF COUNTY
Section 5.1 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. The computerized
Gate Fee Collection System, which shall be provided by Operator
in accordance with Section 4. 6 of this Agreement, shall be
approved by the County, which approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld.
August 30, 1994 -17- DRAFT
Section 5.2 INSPECTION OF SCALES. The County may, from
time to time during regular. business hours, inspect the scales
and test the accuracy of same.
ARTICLE 6. RATES.. .
Ef:.<'�nw::ar.;,,:: ::•.:err rama:'foi{`C4`•7 '+`52
.`•:
Section 6.1 BAS RATE. � � ^;-�t:� �r �:. �• ` '<
.,,....,.,.... ....,.............. .........:.... :<•x:2:,saXs•:cu.::..:::t:.r:;w.::M cwY:.::a+iY:siti.:.�:`Y:%f
q{•,wxum;�•r:pru.»u"acs YVK .
:? ; the Transfer Station Proprietary Rate shall be
determined and established by Operator at its sole discretion.
Notwithstanding section 4.11, .it is understood that the Operator
need not charge a uniform Transfer Station Proprietary Rate to
all customers, but may vary the Transfer Station Proprietary Rate
as between different customers based on various -factors
determined by Operator, including, but not limited to, the
quantity and type of waste delivered by each customer to the
facility and whether each customer has entered into an agreement
with the Operator in which the customer agrees to deliver some or
all of the customer's future waste stream to the Transfer
Station.
Opera-ter shall-at time_mai-nta-in en file with the
Oeunty, a sehedule-of--Transfer Preprietary Rates and Gate
Rates, ineluding dispesal rates, eharged-te eaeh eustemer. The
sehedul 31ude-a--standard-Transfer Sta-tien Pr-eprietarynit=
and Gate Rate-whieh--Aperater ehar-ges- nleos an-agreement-i-s
Gate Rates shall be-updated-within ten days ef material
net—riaiced—te, ehanges-to- ate-estemers-and Transfer Stazren
August 30, 1994 -18- DRAFT
Preprietary Rate and Gate Rate, Wad en-iEerring ef an agreement wi
The-sehedule shall speeify and distinguish .,...ween the
Trans fer--Statien Preprietary Rate and the Gate Rate, and shall:
The-purpose-of this-seetien is-te enure-that therates
eharged by operater as well as fees and sureharg �d by
Publie Reeerd,---so asr-tom--premete eeeperatien an truss. ,._tween the
Operaterithe GeuAty,
infemat-ienreasenably neeessa-ry te-e€€eetuate- he
this-seetien.
Section 6.2 SURCHARGE. -.The County may determine and
establish at least once every two years, effective on the date
determined by the Board of Supervisors, the Surcharge, which
shall be added to the then applicable Transfer Station
Proprietary Rate, and collected as part of the Gate Rate.
Operator will be provided at least ninety (90) days written
notice of any newly established Surcharge. In the absence of the
County establishing a particular Surcharge amount, the Surcharge
to be collected by the Operator for the County shall be thirty
percent '(30%) of the then applicable Transfer Station Proprietary
Rate.
Section 6.3 GATE RATE. The Gate Rate shall consist of the
Base Rate, Mandated Fees, Surcharge and disposal costs.
August 30, 1994 -19- DRAFT
Section 6.4 ' INITIAL SURCHARGE. Effective on the effective
date of this Agreement, the Surcharge shall be:
of the Transfer Station Proprietary Rate less the
amount of all Mandated Fees imposed and received for use by the
County with the exception of Mandated Fees imposed for 1) any
household hazardouswaste program, and 2) any fee imposed
pursuant to Public Resources Code section 41901, as said section
is amended from time to time, for preparing, adopting and
implementing a countywide integrated waste management plan ("AB
939 Fee")., or any future similar waste management fee.
The Sureharge-established by this-seetlen shall remain- is
e€€eet for--six-menths-€ the-e€€eetive date-e€-tris-Agreement
after hieh time-the-Boma establish different Suaeharge
The-6ureharge-established-b is-s•eetien shall apply e
Transfer Station Preprietary Rate enly.
#3t
;::: eIerlaaidf
'iM.iiiiii:•i;:i•{:::'!tiry::`i�!<!':iifG!;•:<J;'::<::<•iii..-i:0i:<viiiTiii•viii"':ii%vi:i':.iiiii':ni•}L.ii•i i<:::iv!<i4: ...<...v......
.. :: :' :::.::vtii.'<•'::i:;...tin-:v...:..:.Y.}:.....:..... .:./::�.:.:..r. .::.. .......:...�.... �..�...v.:: ....... ..:.ii..v:••{iin ..... .......A.:... ....v...x...v:......:..:...:.:.....:...:
.:-:.:>::.::r::.;:.:;:.:::::.ii:.i:.;:.ii:.i;iii:.;'.i;;:;•:.:i:.;:.i;::.iii:iiiiii>.»::'.:�::;:;;:.::;::;;;;....i::.i:::.i:.;i;i';.:::.i;:.ii;;;;i::i::.;iii:.:.iii:;;;::;::�;;:.;:<::«:::::;;;i::.:;i:.::.;;:.i:.i::...;':.ii:.;;;'.ii>'.>
::i':i-:<•<:�i.:n::iii:::<iiii:C<::i.isi::Y:i::i::i::::ij:"isii::::•:?<L::i::i::ii::i::ii:::is:ii::i::iii::i':.:;:'iiTii:'ii:1'Ti2vv:i::i:::::n::=:::i:'^.iii:iiiiiii:::niii:!-iiiiiiiiii:::'piii::.iiii:�':ii:�ii:
:•:iY,.4?ilii:iii;i':.:f.<iLiih:::':::::::::::::::'::..:;...:Ci: .:••:
r�:.:f.:::::.'�':',.". ::�::y::iji:::: i•L::i:::: :. iv::" ' `::i�::•:.!.. is i:::j::i. }v':.:: .i <:i:::: .::::.
August 30, 1994 -20- DRAFT
;cassw'_::?;:%x?.rY<s+?:a;-,;r'%;?:o;;-:::sY%•'.sx::as;;r�?::- ??•:?: _ ;,:<.,.;,::ar:.,- ,,: <:iiiii•r-r? q:•.r.f::',:ri:r.yY.,r..x:?:�::::.r:,y.;.'•;;Y:i
fi?:'.`.'<•f?`•:"fi•:f ••«: ".?4Q.. ..,�?: ..r.. .;.?.: .:R;:?'y'r: „rY,..+F+^+v. f 3`..
..i:?^ :? ::<?� :+�-�'3:;z::�.� �'':�.,� :..,' '`�#�..:: �`� :L�TI:r•' t7€�3fr.?�:.Eiff%l�F.f . lt:
fv.+.o.,?:-}..-.u,?R: ?`�Y)fX„??,?•.<,?:•.:.:.............:..pf;?:;:::-:::.::::::.•?:•::•'?::i:r ::??u;-ss::::.Y.s-.: ::,:.:: �,itktha:.i'+k:'G:;M''h�w .�..L:::R+,L::C<C:6iiti:.:?..w.af,+f6.u';:ar:G'.'fo-i.:?:"vi:?::'?
}7.Q?'if.PK'...Y .> .:: fY;..:. .;Y..... a. :`3' ?. vr« :.: :rft••,MwoapA..,FpF<�+�ipngrt'4c c�,47'K+.... .::.olAif�?'.. iii7.
FIN :Wi ��9,,vvC•'+Y_j"� }Y�fjffr ^W"Y`..'•QY•/Y'(�:f��g4ri•:N f:;f..:�AiT�' Yf�",1, f'ti%`:< jyy� f
•�}+ WF n? W .YM11�{' \{rr:•�.f'� iiii •. : :�I-: {F.�{':".�LI:.7w... .. ?..' fi..: : ..
v.•:::::::-:-:::,•::.}};r�•.-•V•:Z`�• :�'.,..�::::::::::?••:i•w:::::::::.... } v......:..r.....••�fr• .•:::x:::•:w::•::..v'�j..... ....... .•:•tG4.-.?�.•.'.:N ..v..?...r..• yF.;
>>wvs-.-::.s-.-.:.'}.,.'..r.:o-:axuss:abs.•:.•:.,a...,..•r.•::r:rtir:::..-:r::.,•.,•:?:::R�R:s:S:•.-:s:-s:?Srv;'•:;:w:•}?Y::,x;.:.:sssx,G.:a??.vr::r,.-r.:vti•.,•.+•.:,s.'r.+�f'rxhSx=. ��•,}�����,>} :.isa..::•rr:r.•r.,�.:?.,�,,.,.Nrr,v�;:�'�Yk-' rr'r'n/+:•xx
�� •'''{":�'v+<•}•+v+i v."1?i'Y.$n�`v+q���rn4%•Y ,+:;?•?}}M?.:i;;-%•}:•:?v'.`•i:':i??:???????4}?:•:-:;tr:-:ii?•:fii:%:.riniivC4:iv4:i:::.::nS:A'C4n:\\?•:v+�.'�n�'vV.'3":'-,r�vti''.'$."4v.'Y•:O:`+"'���>rifv'�f:ir+�Lk•`r:'+ ��%W�.•.ki:?ti?{}m
':« ����Ri��.,�i.-:�w�:•�R•'•. ,�i,:''Y '• ivFi�:r� .:r::. .: ?,},.:• •::.•:,•:.:.r.� '
•f5. #d {?,:<v:.??i�tia�.: +:<Yct.-::?>:@}::,.•::::.c::x:G::?:.:;:::ff:;:r..:as::::':::?r;••}•`�r.-`.::;:i:':;?tx•:::::.a:° ;c�.d:"� `:s:�ko-?F,•:rr:r.•.•::,•::w•:`-:,�;, f;:r�':! .. f:?:�
o' y:ramgp;.acvar'
?nv fn]5:::•$`?F.•r`.';i?vv�tti .ASLi'•':::�'4i''-;.,.'•.'..':W?::n\C:}:j:..:.:::'^:•:?.::?:'4}h
Section 6.5 CONTRACTS. For all contracts entered for the
delivery to and receipt of Solid Waste at the Transfer Station,
the Surcharge applicable at the time of the contract shall apply
for the term of said contract: The parties agree that any later
established surcharge amounts shall not apply to waste received
pursuant to such Solid Waste contract for the term of said
contract.
Operator shall advise County of any contract subject to the
privileges of this section immediately upon execution. Operator
shall provide County with any and all information .requested by
County concerning any such Contract, including providing County
with copies of such contracts upon request.
Operator shall also provide to County upon request, copies
of all contracts for the transportation (hauling) and/or disposal
of .Solid Waste transferred at or processed through the Transfer
Station.
??:rr•ir.?-+sY:aa-fi:?: n+YFY.??::tx....:.,-a:insc+Y:•as?»ri.Yi:%%?:x^r•:?-'??ary.•:y'?q"i?a:'^Y,;aa?%?;f-i??�+•?;?
..:.fid;•:' -::?:.:::t:rr;?:� :•.. -: :•: •' - ::t�'?�•::•::.::.
Yf.^???r:%'•;:•?:•:???!•;"??ihti•%C;????•:?:p;v.;..<:::-;ri?r:,+?:4?Y:'.::nr'^:?rrri:?:n;:;r;;r;;?;':?K�?:Prr?;;r'v4?:i?:�4?;?O:?^?Y?•?:f?:::;;x:.:::y;.�:?rp'-i•??•i?;':x.;i?::.;??:vi.?•r.:;;r?:::.vmr;?:?;;i::.�p??:?S?:.r:-?"::?•?�'-:
�a�nta�:n::::on><:f;..::�< >::;:w:..::��::::>::�:..::::;:�o ..:<::,. :::;»:::: :::><:�ch ;..:..';?�::�;:.>::»::?:.::.:���:.::::..r'><�t:• �>�an:
...............:..:.............:.:.:.....::.....:�...1 .:.::..:�t.��::::...:�.:�::::...:...xt�xt�..:.::.::a:::............��uZ�.�:csf..::..'.�'ra.......�:a....:.........:�:..............
August 30, 1994 -21- DRAFT
':.}\JT'::•Ti:.{ri^TTT:•:JT:ti.i}i}}TTTTT'-iTY}:JTii}TTT:pi::O:TT.T>TTTYTTYTT}:Ti}}W.T.::::.TT}.ir!•}3C:T"�:'Olr.Yf'vTTl�'}};-.}--.fv`}:i•{;;<:`.iY:;T:
R"4ffn'::::::}v.:..... w}: '•:••::::::..:...:.. ..{•}:•T..............:.......:..:...;x{{{•}:.::: '::'::{}v':..}::....�::•• :• ;, -:..}�tv..: ' .{v}:.} '...i ii:.v..,- .:..;:;::}/:n::::...::.;:::........ n......:
,..,.y.:•.::::: .. ,•:•vtt4Y•{•}:::..::..:::::::::::::::::::::.�:.::::::::::::.�::::n..�..:............ ,-•::.:. ,..t.. ,........ .:...:...:r....�n:}}:{J::vi•}S:•}}wT:vrvr:5
..t•:r ::ic•:k}.w.r...r.....::.::::..:::::::::::..:..:::::. ,.:::•:.:,:...n`.�,-:r::'xi::.: �xv::m
w:::::::::::::::::::x.....t...'}:::.,.:_n::v n...,,xvh•::hw,4,•n::�Pi:•%{v.n.v....
..............
4.Y++i)Wv,.wS.{4R +hl�h+h\'•.\•.v'::...v.`•h:':`:''v:•}ri{:%......x.t.xn..vv..........t ..nt avv v
'• .r,;r{:i?":t?K"r:.rY{ :`.`{Y::-.�r::.:.,::??{Trxxir�H..'Triy..�fi...rF;rw:3.;�. ""y` "SSY.•'F✓.+.:-. rtSee. �'.'2x�iu�t,�ftS`f,:F::t;4:--tp?3S!`.
•'^"':k�'c: `{+ - •:ic3x.N:•n-.a:JT::{{aL`.tk.:w`.oaaw:a'• ?�:w:tav'�:.ftJ.t:t,::.:,wca'.�'..�:ay.:L:{..,,`''iSct?:k�szdssba�c•:ira;:,�a:` � .{:,�,�;^a;�::{a �:k6 '
,CH4!rr}Y. �Yx:4!`• K.. tC. SAFS`b v���?,�yy WI£ A�.
••��v •iCTnttt {`TSL, �$lQtvt�4 ha•.a+ 'v�'•�JsGt +tC{��ivwbv�'GC• .. .
�F^'. ,.N`?2::•:m..:a,�{F:"'x•:Y;J."oy.. .;t'rE.fr4`••�Y't •;:•.:`:`.•� }:Y.•.^-.L:,y'M:'a:m•).'. i•.'?'1.'.c:',r V.:t}C?''` `:�•`} .�c•' w3--"rrrx?r.JF.r:::•r:»hw��;:";riYJ4kJ?`r?.� '. ......
'� � }�z��I.L"•'.� E�E�:�'••�>� Y�'��'t.''•`•�� l:°� :��i� <h"�.`'�!: S�'.1: &$••f ?b �• t
,�':v1�d66ACi"Sa4`':�aF'.tt'v.{,:t:xC:^•:`a�,.r.",.,�4'?-:<isiS4'Siw:-.-r}}+::�.6.4'•>d«?,ZF:.J�,x' fic:�S3.Utv'RaVa• fKAV36ca7acac7F�G :6ti@,:!R�i'txn''44"a4kaL y'
K. :-r a,yxa•TT::.,'.x.:..YTx:ttit!it-}:.t::.Y:!!:.y,-v;y;:.-:tsT.�-^c;m',:.'Trrti{;:`i:rr:xr.:i:rttc.:.^.,:nC?'7{,.u.....c4Jce:•cY:},,;.:;!i::.,.rr.::"<,r..1:�.,?�.:';`:�t:,;p�:;x::!Sox:::.:r.:<x;'.`•tx:{«{?i`!4t!.-.:Sy
... :;9. .;./.f{+fS;^:Q�;.:.y}•.......: ,rry i11� ���� �v"`�,K.K x �4f f
ter, ....:.....:....,
.� .. ....{. v....n:..:.. �,'...:.. -+�' :moi•.'.'.' "�:. .... '�`'. ,`Y••'•:t };•: ',
.dn{t{,.xbo-'.{^.'c�.:S u::waw::a'w'2:;::k,:.}:o!y+c%v:•wrv.•:w:mt,c-}:iJ.w:}.'Sa: F};3rac :.:sSa::�e�«:w:aawcwiesa.+.tf::tki� '�wsw:cSico:cahu
+pC.yt{t'GJp:. {t?Qk:::::tt.: 't � :y�} ' r?-j[C't::S%UP:{-Y F^.`..f? yM}iIX^.:tM:t: tn+iti:f..•:J-
i.}T�T•:.Tv::J}:M{{:4:it:!.T:{^T:^y�:JYY:C�{.yi:-!.v t::::y:t:'riyyn}};:.ri:';+.T;: �4�LL�rr..yK��`�►�' {'�.
fjj f�j.. .} x •y1� r .. .. -.vi.�:L�:�lt:S.^•.:�. 'i::.�f�'ii�i'�'G��'Et ••'�. G��Of�i,,:iMV.MI;UI :C�i
C XII lri:.<4`.�<vCtiutyvfiiANf}:�...i-:ii::?tiiii: ::ti�:if'..'...::::•:}}::' k•::
.•:w::x• !.{•:i::}:•:::n+...:..a{..tv}'f.J:Jhiv:{{{LS' FhtiF.C{t4:vrvYn..xFiS{5C1tiv:CvhTii%ah..
v. .:r.... {};L.`,:t?.:v}:{:is��:ii:4:::.y:::v��:Q:v!iii`:::::::?•wSiiAi]}::ti::j::} ::iY:}:v{}�i}iR:}}r}i}�:n::p}
�tv,+�`nat.:nv.,v::::.v:::J}:i{•:::C}:{L:::iY:�T:J:^}:•}:in.........n..t................n,.....v..r......,...,t..n::�C.nv:r:S•Tf::4.Ytii-wi}:u-}:V:4'::;v::}rii:i::ii}iiiixiiii:::iCt:<i:-ii::::i:
TTT}wT:•}TY:4T}}"^:i}Y'JY:{.}"FiT}}TTTX^}TTTF!^:^TT}nv!?T};."-;:::TTTTTT:O}Ti}}TiT:{.}-:.iT:T:::i':•}TTiTl:n}":J:
nv.�.pT:•:M%•%{T+�C.v.:T::}:M.:C;':n'.;�:�.Ti}'•TT}"JTiT::TTT:YTT'::•TT:}:{}i{::::::::':C}:::'TTTTTT'JTTTTTTT:?TT{ti::•;y-TT-t•
� •n,ty+t t.yy,,. .:{{.:::{•x•::uitJ::•}.:.:}:.::.....h,-.:.:.:.n..:::::::.::n-.,.::.�::::::.:::::::.•:::::::Sii:........:......t.t.w....
v}\`Y{•S:dS}:a:{ham?`.{:.c::n.hht':-:.{{{.}:.Y}}:•}}}}}} :-}}:-}}:-}:-}}}::.::.......:...::::::::...:......:...:-::-::...... ::..
{{.{i{{::{!t-:i.}r.}:{::.{r::i•T}}:-}T:{::-}:-T;.:T:-T:{.T;•TT:JT-TT}>}r}T>T:T::::.YT:.:..}:::.TT:-T:{•T{t::::!•T}'-}}}:_:-��:::.TT:T.:.T:::•TT-T.-::YT:->::{-}>::::.:{!oTT-:.Y.oT•T}TTT}Ta:_-'.:"..T:}}T:i!!-:•}:-:>:::T-'•}T:c_}:T}T:.}:;{{{:-TT}}T:-}}TTT
} '::.:'d�;-�:�txZ::'� . �u:�� `�:>::�s� ::�h�:'hrat�:>:::<E2a: >{•�F ::�n���xc��`ray �:{��:s: rss�:�::�?����;s::«k>::
..:.r.�.........::::::{:::•y:..}-'':ST:','':•.: :Y}::... ..:K.}...:.i}}....:...:......A:r.......::::A}......r..}..v...::-.v..:..v...........:...w: ..:...:.w:. ..:....}ry........:..:...:...
},;x::.. .... ........................v:::::::•::.;.........-•:-:n:;•w:nv:::::::::::;••:rw:.v::nw:::{:x:::{.}}•.v:x::mw:x:x::::nv:::::::::x:::m:rn.:mvx:
'.v\-•;.w::::::nv._:;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::{::::.v::::-T}}}':{nv::::::::J}Y.T'.T:.v:::::::vi}i}TT}}T:J}TT':q:.Yrt•TT JTT:J::::niT:-'}-:::...v:r:::.}l:.T.:::::::::::::.;.
i:�:.:-`.-C:?i:ti:}:Yi}.:}:{`y3'.yT'.�vn}i.:n.......::v:::::::::::v:n:v:::::::::::::::::::.v::::: •. m:::::::::rv... ::::::::::: ..•.n.:::n ::{.:............... ::...:.........:n.::....Ai:::::::w::..i:.::: .v..w:.:.
K�JTw't;:{a!•:'o-o'{eac.;• >:utt
::uxrit•:':u•:}}:t!.T:!t!•T tto.}.::::{• :-;:-}T:.T.:::r:
-:..::::::::.,-.:...:xr:::nvnv...:.v:... r:x K .....i•TT:.:.
.... .. ... yr r..t... :•:Yi::::::h::i::u{C•, .{:".:::t:}::}f:::.'}Y:i::}}:i{:{:::yY}}::•.{6:}:::n}':::w::.v:::v:::n y::.: ... .. .::::{n.:..... :: .:' :{::v••:!w':• �.L..:. .::': ...i.: .
•}.�:��::.,.:���i�>��:eZ:�><::::�is:><:::�t ���»:.. ��ze��teaa�: �:�>::�. :a,���a:�:•>a��: :a}}}: ::�:���}��s
it:\t{i•.,,iVh-,•...n,.n\t•,ais +....•.�:.::�.:::,...............,::::.::::::.:,•:::........t:.\,..............,:.t,,:n•.,,.n•:.,•:.a.,,�..t.,..nCn{.:xh,....t:o'::\;;{;:i::•`::;x,::t::i�::•:::::::::::::::.:::::;::•:,•.,•:::::n,..,
TT:>:JTiT:{JT}}}:i•T}}}T}}}}}'J:J:ti4}};ttiJ}YT•}};.;}Y.JT:v,.
S �:x`-.•`rA4`fi+A:. •:::i:,n:.:r...TT'JT"•Tw v..v::--rc.:vnh.......:.,.:t::: .....
...:.:.... .
•S'svaat.nJ�.�2.�`Y?�.°•.64,).;h.,-.,-::..::::: •t•.:::..:: ,•.::.,,,n+::,,::::::?d::::}}ic:,,,,}}5::}}:::....,..,:.-:.r.:.:.n......,nw.....,::}n-::,-T:,-}w.;.;:....:::;::::n:::.{.},..,.:}•h..,n,:.n....:.v.n...t..,r...
:.cu.}},v.Yx...:tJ':t.}w.w.:,e..y.}}..:::::,:.:-::...,-:::.�._--::::::::::..::.,-::.:-:.,-::.�{a:}}...},}v.::-- r.'. -n,.:.:,-.--•r-Y'::.:::.:-:::.,-:uo}T-:-cTT_TY::_'-:}-:}-::::;•wTTTT:ii•:TY::::::.:i•::::::r' __:.}T:r.!:}:T
't..t::....... .:F.....Jam•}}tE .......a:. ,•::::::.o:.................r..t.. n4. .:.:.;. .ar..r-.:-::.}�':R:ic;S::.t}:•}••>:�.f .•::.�::::. ::w:.......,...... .f...
-:.�w, ::i�tvt ::.a•: .a{}:{Y :::...n .::�:vvv::::nw:w::::::�
�:�-,-..�'k:-`.�$} vik}fes ll}.t•::.vml ........... ..::. ...w.}':.v::... v::.:::::::m:::::iiijiiif:}:4::::::.•r.•:n..............n...:
n.rw.v:•rn•::Yxx:x::::::n.::. ...nv,. rti.."...-.;}. :nv:.v::::.}iv..,v.,vvv}}:}n-::ry}}}'•}iii .{4i::.:.... .........
'C:K.•:G}}'v»:}}:ti.Y}:!!4:t^:IXrfttrv,:•T::x:.v:.v::::::!::!::::::::::nv::p}TTTTT::.i..T.!.T-::!:f.^}:_'::::..vr::nvnT-:{:-:.::....}'x:nTf::':T':.:.Ty�4}'x.�.£r t:n-.w:titv.x}-:p.:::y:.:::::.r::.......::.: '
yy1� .�}�l +�;� �y,y��j. �•�.•y� •�, t:}}i:.v.:-.:.i::n.+•..i' `J.t-.
�'.{is.•:•.:ii}}� "SiF1iA 'v.}�:}iiRi-��%Y. : .3M.7w1{R-�3i�.7w>ii{:��{a►��vfi.? :iS:Q::i s���•if��V: :VW��.n��ii::%ti{{�{;
.....:.......:..::.:-::.::.:tt::.,..............................J..:••,-Y:_Y'.YT�,�.::::;t::t.}T}'i-;r:-T:-,:-}TT:-T::JTTT}}'•TTT'-TT`:}Y:!-:TTT:.T;:TTYYTT:_T'-,:�T:�TTT-•YT}':::::::
....: :..�'. . �.-K,. .. ..:{ii::::s}:{.:{::tti•TL;:;•;-:;.:::, ...:..}•:?:T:.::t•:JT. ..}�...
j{��j :{A!;�( ��rr, �y �f y� y�Q?-}%:{+t+:?{�•.Yr'i}+}•::{- ��;j ;y{-�,�yiK:L:e;�} may. may, /}{ }�.
ii:�i•V�:+IM � r{•:��V�1F7�7.3.���+:ji:::.i:i.iY��J17.i7 }.i;}.:::}M!M4'%:ti:��:�w.�'A.�i!:W.SI[���ifx�i3:`,l}'..:...•�...'i1✓�?W!�f�
:.".:fi:SS::i:<>'{:':.>::}:}}'�n:t{•�TT>r:.;...TT::J>:.>:.:::::.>T:}}:}}'-:>}f•T K!!•>}:}}T:{•T>:{:::T:i{•}}»{::•T:::.w:.:}>:::{i{{y:vT;.}:.:_:{:::{.T:J{{:{•T: :-}::::!.T}:.T.}:.:i-T:_TTYT':.T�>T}'.TT:�T:
- :Qit::i:?•_�_:•:x�:.ti{`;�'}•::vti.-:I�::i:�i::�:::Fii:��1:?CLLL"::?:i`:::i}}::?{:ij:'':::::::.'.:•.:F}i:y ::�:i:::}::iCj:}v:.?:x}.::T'::?:...:::::::�•'..•:.::::. f:}f?.:n!IrY"�:':'is�ii::f:i:?ij�:j:[)ii::::'::}} L}�.'_y:::.•.:
Ith
�::>?-:;:»<;•::>::.> ;x:::<L:?:•:;:>_:;:z;:r>::::::::<;::;:>:� :`;:;:}::::;:::';::.;'::<:>::>::>T':.<:;::}�'�:T-Lzt«;;<:>:}::{<::;:>::>:z<;:>:«:>`::T:z;<}:{:{:>:;:<<{LLL:;::`{»::>:`::>::}::>:::»:>`<::::>::>::>::>:::;><»>::.::.:::<:»»»»::>:;'::::.::::::>:»>;::r;;:::>::>::>:}':.::
.�.... s
August 30, 1994 -22- DRAFT
w:.;x;;^:::;}:;::rc• q..w .iix•:<:vaxa:r:.}:c:q}k?Ti%.r.:Y4::':r':::}.'•::9•:,'xyi.•�'<;`x:
YtAv\::moi\v+vvv{v�{+:v i:'-::::::.. LiFv.:v::•:v.••••••;,-::A\•"••v.::.nkS::ttti2i}}}1tC:•Nv{:[�LC.�:�vv�`LhtGM':%�V{JJ3:v'tCIX
`!•' 'ifs.
. r.r:a„ru . x>:- }"-:-vsm; •'•sa+.. fsw,.i-r�+ov �,
i0�ri�bvt4�'G'•i0�•�bb'vC�•:Yv tk�+tKR.Qi:•-r{jv�i:�SCC.'>.v �Vv::ti`vi� PwtGM•triiX:$� Si 'CCifi::]L{: .
ryy �"'+�,Y,,,�y1. t},} .y;.io a .+y�;:.:. /..5�.,x{.�.+{m�1.2"m'y, •;:= __ _ :� ,�Xr .M,..?f,Yet.-Sia}":�.y<'•}`.•:YJi.Y}'<:Y!•:� ?�+}"�,!•ry
il'�}. S+ � :�.2f�'li� V.�",r-':: •� .�/Y�.MM1F:-Y'}`C��� � ��. ••VS'MFS�i;�i1.��' 'YYF
• •+ ••' ••• y • •••••�tiQv+•• ��• . ••nAri�:•Yv'iv.'"v�i'•:C:��iiVG4S
•�A"d`GwhviK�:i«vC.' ^KOv• �Yt•.tOiv:
-'}}}T•vi}"."{. f:�i}'hi}}'.m}:�v..;fA,ti"•y'r}ti:::Y:ji itC:;riviiiiiiii fit+ifi ..
N:...
`TaTin:•`:i}::iG}f::w3a tK• 'f.'Tit:wir S:ri••ri.A;ii:Ya,:}:f;}::n..naY;w.:::;•.Y.:}};5. <x
ARTICLE 7. PERSONNEL
Operator shall assign qualified personnel to operate the
site as may be required to assure a smooth and efficient
operation in compliance with all. applicable Permits.
The County has the right to request, in writing,
administrative action, including the removal of any employee of
Operator who violates any provision of this Agreement, or who in
the opinion of such requesting party is unsafe, negligent, or
discourteous to the public or others in the performance of
his/her duties. Upon receipt of such a request, Operator shall
immediately take whatever administrative action,' which, in its
judgment, is necessary to resolve the situation. Such action may
include removal of that employee from the Site.
A Site Supervisor employed by Operator shall be present at
the Site at all times that any operations are being conducted
thereon.
Operator shall file with the Director the names, addresses,
August 30, 1994 -23- DRAFT
and telephone numbers of the Operator representatives who can be
contacted at any time in case of emergency.. These
representatives shall be fully authorized to respond so as to
resolve the emergency.
ARTICLE 8. . UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION
Section 8.1 ASSURANCE OF UNINTERRUPTED OPERATION.
Operator, in entering into this Agreement, assures that it will
provide for the operation of. the Transfer Station in an
uninterrupted manner for as long as the is useful and usable,
except as provided in Section 9.4 below. Operator acknowledges
the hardship that would occur if the Transfer Station is not
operated properly or is prematurely closed. The County and
Operator recognize that in the ordinary course of events, certain
unexpected events may result that may place a burden on the
requirement of uninterrupted operation. However, it is the
purpose of this Article 8 to establish that it is Operator's
obligation to avoid any interruption of operations except for
those that are outside of Operator's control, as provided by
Section 9.5 of this Agreement.
Section 8.2 LABOR DISPUTES. In the event of a labor
dispute, Operator shall use its best efforts to keep the Transfer
Station open and to operate it in accordance with this Agreement
unless a mutually acceptable alternative is agreed upon by
Operator and the County.
ARTICLE 9. DEFAULT, REMEDIES
Because of the complex nature of this Agreement and the work
August 30, 1994 -24- DRAFT
to be performed hereunder, ' together with the need for close
cooperation and coordination between the parties, it is not
anticipated that either party will declare the other in default
under the. terms. and conditions of this Agreement except as a last
resort. lHowever,. in the event of any such necessity, the
following provisions are made a part hereof.
Section 9.1 FAILURE TO PROSECUTE WORK. Should Operator
fail to prosecute-the work or..any. severable -part thereof in
conformity with the requirements of this Agreement, the Director
shall provide written notice to Operator specifying in detail the
defect or default in performance (the "First Notice") and
Operator shall have the right to cure same within a reasonable
period of time.
If after the First Notice is provided to Operator, the work
is not performed in accordance with the Director's specified time
frame and a reasonable time to cure so as to ensure its
completion in accordance with this Agreement, the Director shall
serve further notice (the "Second Notice") upon Operator of the
County's intention to take further action as provided by law.
The Director shall make appropriate and detailed written findings
of fact which specify the event of default.
No earlier than thirty (30) days after the Second Notice,
County shall have the power and ability, if Operator is still in
default, to take such actions as provided in law for remedying
the same, including the termination of this Agreement.
Should the County fail to perform any of its obligations
August 30, 1994 -25- DRAFT
under this Agreement, Operator may declare the County in default
after following the same two notice and findings provisions
required of the County above: Thereafter, Operator shall have
the power and ability, if the County is still in default, to take
such actionsas provided in law for remedying the same, including
bringing suit in a court of appropriate jurisdiction for
equitable or legal relief or both.
The foregoing notwithstanding, neither party may bring an
action seeking money damages unless it has first provided the
other party with 30 days notice of its intention to do so
together with written notification of the specific actions which
the,other party may take to remedy the default which will form
the basis for- the claim for monetary damages. If the other party
in good faith commences the actions specified within the thirty
(30) day period, the first party shall not bring the action for
damages.
Section 9.2 CONVICTION OF CERTAIN CRIMES. Operator agrees
that a single conviction of Operator, its parent, subsidiaries or
operators, or their officers or employees at the level of Site
operations manager or above, acting within the scope of their
employment, of bribery, antitrust, corruption or theft relating
to or involving directly the Transfer Station shall constitute an
event of a breach of this Agreement subject thereupon to the
provisions of this Article unless Operator, promptly initiates
and follows through with appropriate disciplinary procedures and
action considering the nature of the offense and resolution by
August 30, 1994 -26- DRAFT
the courts.
Section 9.3 CONDEMNATION. In addition to any other remedy
available to the County, it has the right and authority under law
to condemn the Site.
Section 9.4 RIGHT TO TAKE/RIGHT TO POSSESSION. In the
event that Operator chooses to no longer operate the Site,
Operator agrees that it will give County notice of its intention
to cease operation ninety (90) days prior to the cessation. If,
after receiving such notice, County initiates eminent domain
proceedings to acquire the Site, Operator agrees- that it will not
object.to or contest County's right to take, or right- of
possession of, the Site. Nothing contained herein shall
constitute a waiver of the right' to contest valuation at any
stage of the proceedings. County and Operator agree that the
provisions of this paragraph may be enforced by means of the
remedy of specific performance.
Section 9.5 FORCE MAJEURE. Operator shall not be liable
for a default if the failure to perform under the terms and
conditions of the Agreement arise out of. causes beyond the
control or without the fault or negligence of Operator. Such
causes may include, but are not limited to, acts of God, or the
public enemy, acts of the County in either its sovereign or
contractual capacity, fires, floods, earthquakes, epidemics,
quarantine restrictions, suppliers' and vendors' strikes and all
other labor disputes, freight embargoes, and unusually severe
weather; but in every case the failure to perform must be beyond
August 30, 1994 -27- DRAFT
the control and without substantial default or negligence of
Operator. Operator shall make every reasonable effort to
mitigate the effects of said causes.
Section 9.6 - SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE... .. Notwithstanding any
other available remedies, - the obligations duties and rights of
each party under this Agreement shall be specifically enforceable
by the other party.
Section. 9.7 NONEXCLUSIVE REMEDIES.. The rights and remedies
of either party to this Agreement as provided for in this Article
9 shall not be exclusive, and are in addition to any other rights
and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement; except that
the right of either party to seek monetary damages is limited as
provided in Section. 11.1 above.
ARTICLE 10. INSURANCE AND BONDS
Section 10.1 WORKERS' COMPENSATION. Operator hereby
acknowledges that it is aware of the provisions regarding
Workers' Compensation, Section 3700 of the Labor Code. Operator
shall comply with the provisions of such Section as amended from
time to time with regard to its employees and shall supply to the
County forthwith upon execution of this Agreement, and annually
thereafter, evidence of such compliance.
Section 10.2 PUBLIC LIABILITY. If a willing company can be
located by either party hereto, and the premium for the policy or
policies required hereunder is reasonable in the opinion of
County, Operator shall obtain from a good and responsible company
or companies doing insurance business in the State of California,
August 30, 1994 -28- DRAFT
and pay for, maintain in full force and effect for the duration
of this Agreement and any extension, a policy or replacement
policy of comprehensive liability insurance for the Transfer
Station, in which- the County is named as an additional insured
with Operator. Operator shall furnish a Certificate of Liability
Insurance to the Director before. execution of this Agreement by
the County. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the
policy described by the Certificate of Liability Insurance or any
subsequent endorsement attached thereto, the protection offered
by the policy shall:
(a) Include the County., its officers, employees and
agents while acting within the scope of their duties under this
Agreement, the Use Permit, or any other County ordinance,
resolution or other rule relating to the operation of the
Transfer Station, as an additional insured covering said duties
against all third party claims for negligence; and for
indemnification of the County as provided by this Agreement.
(b) Provide for a combined single limit policy not
less than $10, 000,000 per occurrence; combined bodily injury and
property damage; such policy may exclude liability for bodily
injury and property damage caused by toxic wastes. At every
fifth year of this Agreement, this $10,000,000 minimum limit
shall be increased as directed by the County but not more than
30% for each such five year period.
Section 10. 3 OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS. All insurance
policies required by this Agreement shall bear an endorsement,
August 30, 1994 -29- DRAFT
whereby it is provided that, in the event of expiration, or
proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever,
the Director shall be notified in writing not less than thirty
(30) days before expiration or cancellation is effective.
Expiration, reduction or cancellation of any insurance
policy required by this Agreement without obtaining a replacement
policy pursuant to Section 12.2 to meet the requirements herein
shall be considered a breach of this Agreement by Operator.
Operator shall also carry such other insurance as .may be
required by law. Operator shall be solely liable for any claims
or liabilities caused by its failure .to maintain insurance
required by law.
Section 10.4 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SURETY. Operator shall,
prior to acceptance of waste at the Site -under this Agreement,
provide to the County an irrevocable Performance -Surety Letter of
Credit in the form set forth in Exhibit B hereto guaranteeing
Operator's performance of all provisions of this Agreement in an
amount of not less than $1,000,000.00. This Letter of Credit may
also be utilized to meet the security and performance requirement
of the Use Permit.
The Director may allow the Performance Guarantee Letter of
Credit required pursuant to a franchise between the County and
Operator for the operation of the Keller Landfill to additionally
guarantee Operator's performance of all provisions of this
Agreement.
ARTICLE 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS
August 30, 1994 -30- DRAFT
Section 11.1 GUARANTY BY PARENT OR AFFILIATE. Prior to the
Commencement. Date, and for all conditions and obligations of this
Agreement, Operator shall provide to the Director, proof of
guaranty by the parent or an affiliate of .Operator :acceptable to
the County, of the performance by Operator of each provision of
this Agreement to be performed by Operator. Proof of guaranty
shall be in the form set forth in Exhibit C.
Section 11.2 ATTORNEY'S FEES: In the event of litigation
between the parties arising hereunder, each party shall pay and
bear its own litigation expenses, including attorney's fees.
Section 11.3 INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT.
(a) All work and performances by Operator covered by
this Agreement shall be at the risk of Operator
(b) With respect to third-party claims, Operator
agrees to save, indemnify and keep harmless the County, its
officers, employees, agents and assign against any and all
liability, claims, judgments, or demands, including demands
arising from injuries or deaths of persons and damage to
property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations
herein undertaken by Operator, save and except claims or
litigation arising through the sole negligence or willful
misconduct of the County, and will make good to and reimburse the
County for any expenditures, including reasonable attorney's
fees, that the County may make by reason of such matters and, if
requested by the County, shall defend any such suit at the sole
cost and expense of Operator.
August 30, 1994 -31- DRAFT
/4
(c) With respect to third-party claims, the County
agrees to save, indemnify and keep harmless Operator, its
officers, employees, agents and assigns against any and all
liability, claims, judgments, or demands, including demands
arising from injuries or deaths of persons and damage to
property, arising directly or indirectly out of the sole
negligence or willful misconduct of the County, and will make
good to and reimburse Operator for any expenditures, including
reasonable attorney's fees, that Operator may make by reason of
such matters and, if requested by Operator, shall defend any such
suit at the sole cost and expense of the County.
(d) Should any party successfully challenge the
validity of this Agreement or the procedure by which this
Agreement was entered into or the validity of any County action
which authorizes the County to enter into this Agreement, then in
such case the Operator shall have no cause of action for damages
or any other relief against County as a result of such successful
challenge. In the event of any such legal challenge, Operator
shall defend such action or proceeding at its sole expense and
Operator shall save and hold County harmless from any claims or
awards for third party attorneys' fees and costs.
Section 11.4 ASSIGNMENT.
(a) Voluntary. Operator shall not sell, assign,
subcontract or transfer this Agreement or any part hereof, or any
obligation hereunder, without the written consent of County;
provided, however, that Operator may assign this Agreement
August 30, 1994 -32- DRAFT
without the County's consent to any company which it controls, is
controlled by, or which is under common control with Operator.
As used in this Section, the term "control" with respect to a
company, means the beneficial ownership of more than 50% of the
voting stock of the company.
The term assignment shall include any dissolution, merger,
consolidation' or other reorganization of Operator, which results
in change of control of Operator, or any sale or other transfer
of a controlling percentage of Operator's capital stock. Any
attempted assignment not provided for above without such consent
shall be void ab initio.
(b) Involuntary. Except as may be permitted by paragraph
(a) above, no interest of Operator in this .Agreement shall be
assignable by operation of law. Any such nonpermitted assignment
and any of the following acts, each of which are deemed an
involuntary assignment, shall provide County with the right to
elect to terminate the Agreement forthwith, without suit or other
proceeding:
(1) If Operator becomes insolvent, or makes an
assignment for the benefit of creditors;
(2) If Writ of Attachment or Execution is levied on
this Agreement or other property of Operator such that would have
a materially adverse effect on Operator's ability to perform its
duties and obligations under this Agreement; .
(3) If in any proceeding to which Operator is a party,
a Receiver is appointed with authority to take possession of
August 30, 1994 -33- DRAFT
Operator's property such that would have a materially adverse
effect on Operator's ability to perform its duties and
obligations under this Agreement.
Section 11.5 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. No verbal agreement with
any officer, agency, or employee of the County or of Operator nor
any contract either before, during, or after the execution of
this agreement shall affect or modify any of the terms or
obligations herein contained unless a written agreement, signed
by both parties, specifically provides that same is an amendment
to this Agreement.
Section 11.6 NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY ENFORCEMENT. While
this contract benefits the public interest throughout Contra
Costa County, it is an Agreement between only Operator and the
County and, accordingly, only Operator and the County may enforce
same. No claims, demands, or causes of action by any entity,
party, or person claiming to be a third party beneficiary
hereunder shall be enforceable.
Section 13.7 ARBITRATION. Any controversy or claim
submitted to arbitration pursuant to the express provisions of
this Agreement, or by mutual subsequent agreement, and arising
out of .or relating to this Agreement, or the breach thereof,
shall be governed by the provisions of Part III. , Title 9 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, sections 1280 et seq. as amended from
time to time. The arbitration shall be de novo and subject to a
de novo appeal or challenge brought in the Contra Costa County
Superior Court as to any alleged error of law or as to the
August 30, 1994 -34- DRAFT
admissibility of evidence. California judicial rules of evidence
shall apply to the arbitration proceedings. The arbitration
decision shall be decided under and in accordance with California
law, supported by a preponderance of evidence and in writing in
the form of a Statement of Decision pursuant to Code of Civil
Procedure Section 632.
Section 13.8 CONFLICT. This Agreement is intended to
comply with Ordinance No. 88-81. In the case of any apparent or
potential conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and
the provisions of the Use Permit or any involved development
agreement, the provisions of this Agreement and the Use Permit
shall be read together and harmonized to the maximum extent
possible to effectuate the intentions of the parties. In the
case of any unresolved conflict. between the provisions of this
Agreement and the provisions of the Use Permit, the provisions of
the Use Permit shall control. Notwithstanding any other
provision in this Agreement or in the Use Permit, importation of
waste not originating in Contra Costa County shall be allowed as
required by recent U.S. Supreme Court cases.
Section 11.9 CAPTIONS. The captions and headings used in
this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and are not
to be construed as controlling over the text of this Agreement.
Section 11.10 DELEGATION BY BOARD. The Board may, in its
discretion, delegate to a County employee or hearing officer any
of its functions expressly or impliedly arising from this
Agreement provided that in such case any decision made by such
August 30, 1994 -35- DRAFT
Board, County employee or officer may be appealed de novo to the
Board.
Section 11.11 SEVERABILITY. If any term, provision,
covenant or condition ("provision") of the Agreement or the
application of any provision of this Agreement to a particular
situation is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this
Agreement, or the application of this Agreement to other
situations, shall continue in full force and effect.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if any
provision of this Agreement in itself or as applied in any
particular situation is held to be invalid, void or
unenforceable, it is the intention of the parties that the
remaining portions of this Agreement shall be continued in full
force and effect and that the invalid, void or' unenforceable
provision be severed therefrom.
Section 11.12 MASCULINE GENDER USED. The masculine gender
is sometimes used in this Agreement and is so used for
convenience only and is not otherwise intended.
Section 11. 13 GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be
governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California.
Section 11.14 NOTICES. All notices or other communications
("Notice") to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in
writing and shall be deemed given when mailed by registered or
certified United States mail, addressed to the parties as
August 30, 1994 -36- DRAFT
y
f o l lows:
To County: County of Contra Costa
Attn: County Administrator
To Operator: BFIC, Inc.
C/O: Boyd M. Olney, Jr.
441 North Buchanan Circle
Pacheco, California 94553
With Courtesy as designated by Browning-Ferris Industries of
California.
A change in address or a change in the person or title to
which Notice is to be given shall be effectuated by Notice to the
other party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is effective on the date
first provided on page one hereof.
OPERATOR
Keller Canyon Landfill Company
a California corporation
By:
President
By:
Vice-President
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
By:
Chair, Board of Supervisors
ATTEST: By:
Clerk of the Board
APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:
August 30, 1994 -37- DRAFT
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
GROWTH MANAGE AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DATE: September 2, 1994
TO: Ad Hoe Solid Waste Committee
FROM: Val Alexeeff, Director
SUBJECT: FRANCHISE OPTIONS
OPIiONS RELATED TO FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS FOR KELLER AND ACME
Intent: Ta assist BFI in becoming more competitive
The following items appear to be issues that need to receive Board majority in order to enable
this round of landfill issues to be resolved:
1. Rates:
a. On June 7, the Board of Supervisors allowed rates at Acme/Keller to float with
the market rather than be set with a ceiling and floor through a rate setting
process. No action has been taken by BFI to reduce rates, but it is presumed that
BFI will do so in the near future and that the County will not reestablish its
efforts to regulate rates. In public testimony,BFI's representatives indicated that
the possible $39 proprietary rate for transfer and disposal may no longer be
feasible; however, no definitive proprietary rate has been provided to the County.
Without a precise dollar amount from BFI, setting a County franchise fee as a
percentage of base rate (proprietary rate) remains ambiguous. Additionally,
proposals from other solid waste companies regarding transfer and disposal are
not definitive with regard to proprietary rates and/or government fees.
b. Regulation has been proposed for self-haul. The County has not regulated this
area and there have been complaints about how high the rates are. Should a rate
be established? What should determine this rate?
2. Fee Options:
Several proposals have been made to determine which fees will be collected and at what
rate. The approach to this should occur in two steps. Step one should consist of
selecting the overall method; step two should clarify specifics within the method selected.
Ad Hoc Committee r
Franchise Options
Page 2
September 2, 1994
Overall Approach
A. Fee based on percentage of base rate, e.g., 25%.
B. Fee rate based on flat fee ranging from $8 to $10.
C. Fee based on percentage of base rate including minimum and maximum
parameters.
Step two considerations:
Should alternative A be selected, the base rate percentage can be handled as
outlined in the Staff Report of August 16.
Separate costs for current mandate; (i.e., Eastin Fee, AB 939 Fee, LEA Fee,
LUP Mitigation Fees) and set % cap for base rate. Percent target would yield
in the range of$6.
Should alternative B be selected the flat fee should take into account basic fee
components that can be determined through a budgetary process that identifies
priorities for funding within the overall capped amount which can be adjusted for
CPI. As follows:
Landfill/Transfer related fees '
LEA .752
Resource Recovery .752
AB 939 .152
Host Mitigation 4.00'
Franchise 2.65`
$8.00
State Fee at landfill
Eastin State Fee 1.34
EMrams funded at landfill
Household Hazardous Waste 2.12
'Costs directly related to permit administration as a direct cost of operation rather than fees.
2 To fund State mandated programs
a LUP/Franchise criteria
County solid waste programs
.r r
PP
r Ad Hoc Committee
Franchise Options
Page 3
September 2, 1994
Should alternate C be selected a percentage shall be used; however, the amount
collected, as a result of the percentage, shall not be less than SIM per year nor
more than $3M per year.
3. Host Community Mitigation-Keller
What should be the tonnage or fixed amount for the Keller Landfill host community
mitigation? Should all the mitigation categories for Keller landfill be combined as host
community mitigation?
4. Host Community Mitigation-Acme
Shall there be host community mitigation relating to Acme permanent transfer station and
what should that amount be? Either in percentages or dollar amount.
S. Franchise Fee-Acme
Should Acmebe collecting an additional franchise fee for closure? How shall
jurisdictions that have collected their share of the fee be treated?
VA;dra/gms
939uTmn-Opt.mem
' t
r
,
N 8 $ $ 88
y
U �
z •-
�� +n o
w w x
w °
tPy N
• N *-� a� pppp opp
CiQQ 80
N p�
O � 401)
a �
.t � 8N 88
� � W �M.•+ "� .•+ tri t�f N
� � z
cn ".
.0 w •�
to E
c � o• .aC ';t �' H
d �
44
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY
ARTICLE 1: PURPOSE
A. Purpose of Agreement: It is the purpose of this Agree-
ment to establish, pursuant to the Joint Exercise of
Powers Act, a public entity separate from each of the
agencies. This public entity is to be known as the Cen-
tral Contra Costa Solid Waste Management Authority,
hereinafter referred to as the "Authority".
B. Purpose of Authority: The purpose of the Authority
shall be to exercise certain powers set forth below, in a
manner which will (1) assure the citizens of the member
agencies that certain solid waste transfer station(s)
and/or regional resource recovery facility(ies) , and/or
recycling facility(ies) and/or household hazardous waste
facility(ies) , and/or landfill(s) and related programs
will be operated in the most cost effective manner
possible consistent with the proper concern for the
environment; and (2) allow for the public ownership
and/or management of said facilities, and (3) allow for
such other joint efforts concerning the handling and
disposal of the solid waste stream as may be beneficial
to constituents of the member agencies.
C. Members of Authority: This Agreement is entered into
by and between the cities of Walnut Creek and San Ramon
and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (hereinaf-
ter "Initial Members") , as individual public entities
which mutually promise and agree as hereinafter set
forth. Membership in the Authority is open to any public
entity that franchises the collection and/or disposal of
garbage in Central Contra Costa County. Membership in
the Authority is granted upon a 2/3 vote of all members
of the Authority Board as then constituted, approving the
application for membership, and upon compliance with the
terms and conditions of membership set forth by the Board
and/or in force at that time.
D. Apportionment of &Menses: It is the intention of the
Authority to collect revenues to cover the costs of
Authority operations, through solid waste stream
operations including, but not limited to, the operation
of transfer facility(ies) , reclamation facility(ies) ,
recycling facility(ies) , household hazardous waste
facility(iss) , and/or landfill facility(ies) . To the
extent that operating expenses exceed revenues during any
period, including the initial start up period of the
Authority, the member agencies shall be responsible for
providing the requisite funds to the Authority to ensure
that such expenses are met in that proportion that the
total tonnage of solid waste collected within the
jurisdiction of each agency bears to the total tonnage of
solid waste collected within the jurisdiction of all
members of the Authority. Each member agency's
contribution to such expenses is dependent upon such
member agency's governing body's yearly approval of such
contribution, provided, however, that if such member
agency's governing body does not approve such
contribution, such member agency shall be deemed to have
withdrawn from the Authority and subject to the
provisions of Article 4 D. Sections 1 and 3, exccpting
such unapproved contribution resulting in such deemed
withdrawal.
Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the effective
date of this Agreement the Initial Members shall
formulate a budget for the first fiscal year of Authority
operations, and, in conjunction therewith, shall assign
each member a proportionate funding obligation to meet
the budget agreed upon. If the Initial Members do not so
formulate such a budget and assign such funding
obligation within such one hundred twenty (120) day
period, or within such other time agreed to in writing
which is executed by such Initial Members, this Agreement
shall be null and void.
ARTICLE_ 2: POWERS OF THE AUTHORITY
A. General Powers: 1. The Authority shall have all pow-
ers common to its member agencies, and such general
powers shall further include, but not necessarily be
limited to the following:
a) To advise the member agencies on issues related to
solid waste collection and disposal;
b) To advocate the interests of the member agencies
related to solid waste management issues with local,
state and federal officials;
c) To plan for transfer station(s) , resource recovery
facility(ies) , recycling facility(ies) , household
- 2 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
hazardous waste facility(ies), landfill(s) ,, any
other solid waste facility(ies) and programs, and/or
any related closure and post-closure thereof;
d) To develop transfer station(s) , resource recovery
facility(ies) , recycling facility(ies) , household
hazardous waste facility(ies) , landfill(s) , any
other solid waste facility(ies) and programs)
and/or any related closure and post-closure thereof;
e) To acquire and/or operate and/or contract for the
operation of transfer station(s) , resource recovery
facility(ies) , recycling facility(ies) , household
hazardous waste facility(ies) , landfill(s) , any
other solid waste facility(ies) and programs)
and/or any related closure and post-closure thereof;
f) To regulate rates of transfer station(s) , resource
recovery facility(ies) , recycling facility(ies) ,
household hazardous waste facility(ies) and
landfill(s) ;
g) To advise on matters of solid waste coll:ction and
disposal rates and charges;
h) To advise public entities as to market conditions af-
fecting the marketability of recyclable commodities;
and
i) To market and sell recyclable commodities.
J) To conduct joint studies and/or institute joint
programs as may be required by law or appropriate
regarding solid waste collection and disposal
including, but not limited to, such efforts as may
be required regarding reduction of the waste stream
directed to landfills.
2. Notwithstanding Article 2, Section A(1)
above, the Authority is not authorized to in any manner
impair or interfere with a member agency's franchising of
solid waste collection and/or disposal, except as otherwise
set forth in this Agreement or except as specifically agreed
by such member agency.
B. Snecific Powers: In carrying out its general powers,
the Authority is hereby authorized to perform all acts
necessary or proper for the exercise of said powers which
may include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. To make and enter into contracts;
2. To apply for and accept grants, advances, and contri-
butions;
- 3 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
3. To employ or contract for the services of agents,
employees, consultants and such other persons or
entities as it deems necessary;
4. To conduct studies;
5. To review the Contra Costa Integrated Waste
Management Plan and other such public planning
documents as may be developed, and recommend
revisions or amendments thereto;
6. To acquire, construct, manage, maintain, operate and
control any buildings, works or improvements;
7. To acquire, hold or dispose of property;
S. To acquire by condemnation proceedings such real
and/or personal property and/or rights of way as in
the judgment of the Authority are necessary or prop-
er to the exercise of its powers;
9. To incur debts, , liabilities or obligations subject
to limitations herein set forth;
10.. To levy and collect fees and charges to the extent
permitted by law;
il. To assess and collect, subject to Article 5, Section
A and Article 1, Section D, of both Initial Members
and future agency members, fees for membership in
the Authority, so as to provide moneys for the
financing of its activities, operations, and
expansion which are not adequately funded by the
revenues collected for services provided by the
Authority;
12. To issue bonds, subject to the provisions and limita-
tions of the laws of the State of California; and
13. To adopt annually, by April 1 of each fiscal year, a
budget setting forth all administrative, operational
and capital expenses for the Authority, together
with the apportionment of such expenses by levy
against each member agency to the extent necessary,
subject to Article 1, Section D.
ARTICLE 3: ORGANIZATION OF AUTHORITY
A. Board of Directors: The Authority shall be governed by
a Board of Directors, hereinafter "Board", which shall
exercise all powers on behalf of the Authority. The
Board shall have the authority to carry out all duties
and functions within the power of the Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement.
- 4 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
The Board shall be composed of two (2) representatives
from each Authority agency, who shall be elected members
of such agency's governing body. . The term of Board
membership is unlimited except as a member agency may
provide for its own representatives; however, as to such
member representatives, such term shall automatically
expire when the representative is no longer an elected
officer of the agency that he or she represents on the
Board.
1. Duties of the Board of Directors: The Board shall
perform all acts necessary or, proper to carry out
the purposes of this Agreement and to execute the
General and Specific Powers of the Authority, which
acts include but are not limited to the following:
a) Conduct Board meetings pursuant to a schedule
adopted by the Board;
b) Consider, modify and approve the annual work
program and budget;
C) Levy, fix, set and/or impose fees,
assessments and charges to the extent
permitted by law and by this Agreement;
d) Authorize, review and accept reports and
studies;
e) Review, recommend, approve and/or regulate
rates for services provided by the Authority
or over which the Authority has regulatory
power through contract or otherwise;
f) Recommend action to member agencies and other
public bodies on:
i) The Contra Costa County Integrated
Waste Management Plan and any other
such public planning documents as
may be developed and revisions or
amendments thereto; and
ii) The planning, financing, development
and operation of Authority activi-
ties;
g) Accept agencies as subsequent parties to the
Agreement and members of the Authority, and
their representatives as Board members;
h) Authorize the hiring and/or engagement of
Authority staff;
5 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
i) The Board may, from time to time, declare one
of the member agencies as the lead agency for
specific purposes as may be set forth by the
Board or for the general purpose of staffing
the Authority and carrying out the Authori-
ty's functions;
j) Establish committees to carry out Authority
purposes, and appoint committee members from
the Authority Board, the legislative bodies
or administration of member agencies,
Authority, staff, and/or staff of the member
agencies. The Authority shall reimburse
agency members for personnel costs associated
with the staffing of committees with member
agency personnel;
k) Establish policies governing the compensation
of staff employed by the Authority, which
policies are subject to approval of the
governing bodies of the agency members by 2/3
vote thereof.
1) Delegate duties to Authority or Board staff
and/or members, appointed committees and
committee members, the City Councils, and/or
staff, or the sanitary District Board and/or
staff.
2. Voting Requirements: All actions of the Board may
be undertaken by majority vote of the Board members
present, provided a quorum exists, except for such
Board actions requiring a 2/3 vote as may otherwise
be set forth herein. Each Board member shall have
one vote.
3. Board of Directors Members: Upon execution of
this Agreement, the governing body of each agency
shall, by resolution, appoint• a member to serve as a
member of the Board in conformity with the
requirements of Article 3, Section A.
4. subsequent Authority Members: Any agency which
franchises solid waste collection in Central Contra
Costa County, including cities incorporated and
districts formed after the effective date of this
Agreement, may become members of the Authority, and
its representatives may become voting members of the
Board by presenting an adopted resolution to the
Board which includes a request to become a member of
the Authority, and upon a 2/3 vote of all members of
the Board to accept the new member, and upon payment
of any charges and execution of all documents as may
be required by the Board as a prerequisite for
voting membership. such charges may include such
- 6 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
IN .
d) es: The Board Chairperson shall cause
minutes of all meetings to be kept and shall,
as soon as, possible after each meeting, cause
a copy of the minutes to be forwarded to each
member of the Board.
7. Staffing: Each of the member agencies shall use
its best efforts to provide staff to the Authority
as may be necessary initially for the Authority to
execute its powers and duties and as may be request-
ed by the Board thereafter. Staff may be drawn
from member agencies or agency staff. Additionally,
the Authority may contract with or employ
entities and/or individuals not associated with
member agency staff, as permitted by Article 2,
Section B(3) .
8. Officers: The Board has the power to appoint as
staff to the Board the following officers:
a) Executive Director: There may be an Execu-
tive Director appointed who will serve as the
chief administrative officer of the Authori-
ty. He or she shall be responsible to the
Board for the management and administration
of all Authority affairs pursuant to the
Board's direction.
Until such time as the Board may determine to
appoint an Executive Director who is not a
staff member of a member agency, and for such
other times as there is no Executive Director
serving, the Board may appoint an interim
Executive Director, who shall have such
powers and duties as are set forth in this
section. An interim Executive Director shall
be the chief administrative officer of one of
the member agencies, or such other agency
staff member as the Board deems appropriate.
b) Treasurer and Controller: There shall be a
Treasurer and Controller to be the custodian
of all Authority funds, to pay demands and to
make or contract for an annual audit.
C) Secretary: There shall be a Secretary who
shall be responsible for the noticing of
meetings and recording of minutes of meet-
ings as required by the Brown Act and the
Rules of Procedure.
- 8 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
items as compensation to the existing Authority Wil;
members for previously expended costs in furtherance
of Authority purposes, including staffing expenses,
capital expenses, financing expenses, and
assessments for losses in prior Authority
operations. These examples are purely illustrative,
however, and are not intended to limit the power of
the Authority or the Board to fix whatever buy in,
capitalization or other equalization charges deemed
necessary or proper. Payment of such charges may be
made in any manner deemed necessary or proper by the
Board, including, but not limited to cash payment, a
differential rate structure at Authority facilities,
future capital contributions, surcharges or by other
plan which might include appropriate security.
4. Board Officers: The Board shall by a majority
vote elect from its members . a Chairperson and a
Vice Chairperson. The Chairperson and Vice Chair-
person shall have one year terms and maybe reelect-
ed so as to serve a maximum of two (2) consecutive
one year terms, unless the Board unanimously
approves additional consecutive term(s) as to a
particular Chairperson or Vice Chairperson: The
Chairperson shall preside over all meetings
according to the Rules of Procedure adopted by the
Board. The Board Chairperson shall represent the
Authority and execute any contracts and other
documents when required by the Rules of Procedure.
5. Board Rules: The Board is empowered to establish
its own Rules of Procedure to the extent those rules
are not inconsistent with the laws of the State of
California governing the operations of this Authori-
ty.
6. Meetings of the Board:
a) Regular Meetings: The Board shall hold
scheduled public meetings at a location se-
lected by the Board.
b) Special Meetings: Special meetings of the
Board may be called in accordance with the
provisions of Section 54956 of the Califor-
nia Government Code.
C) Notice of Meetings: All meetings of the
.Board shall be held subject to the current
provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, being
Sections 54950 et sea, of the California
Government Code, and other applicable laws of
the State of California requiring public
meetings.
7
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
9. Funds. Excenditures and Audits:
Each and every expenditure of moneys shall be author-
ized or approved by the Board or by a person desig-
nated by the Board to authorize expenditures. The
Treasurer shall draw warrants to pay demands so au-
thorized for payment by the Board.
Before the Authority may expend any moneys or incur
any financial obligation it shall adopt a budget
showing proposed expenditures for the Fiscal Year
and the proposed means of financing such expendi-
tures. The budget shall be for the ensuing Fiscal
Year, beginning on July 1 of each calendar year and
ending on June 30 of the following calendar year.
The Board shall periodically cause an audit to be
performed with regard to the financial operations of
the Authority.
ARTICLE 4: TERMS OF AGREEMENT
A. Effective Date: This Agreement shall become effective
on the date of its execution by all the agencies identi-
fied in Article 1, Section C.
B. Amendments: This Agreement may be amended by a
two-thirds (2/3) vote of all members of the Board. Any
such amendment shall be effective upon the day of such
action.
C. Undertaking of Specific Projects: Although it is the
intent of this Agreement, and therefore the purpose of
the Authority, to cooperate jointly amongst the member
agencies so as to provide the most efficient operation of
solid waste facilities on a regional basis, nothing
contained in this Agreement is intended to prevent the
Authority from undertaking projects pursuant to separate
contracts between the Authority and individual member
agencies, which projects are not intended to benefit all
of the member agencies. The Authority shall hold title
to each project -in trust for the use of the members who
participate. The members who participate in a project
shall indemnify and hold harmless the members who do not
participate from liability of any kind resulting from, or
in any way related to, the financing, construction,
acquisition, operation or maintenance of such project.
The Authority shall have the power to proceed with the
final acquisition and construction of a project which is
not joined in by all Authority members, only when a
separate project contract has been entered into which
provides arrangements for obtaining funds sufficient to
9 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
pay for all costs of such. project. Such a project
contract shall provide for such payments as shall be
agreed upon, but will be at least sufficient to pay and
discharge all obligations the Authority incurred in
connection with such project.
D. Withdrawal:
1. Any member agency, upon written notice given by
January 1 of any year, to the Chairperson of the
Board of Directors, and all other member agencies,
may withdraw from the Authority effective no earlier
than July 1 of that year; provided, however, that
the withdrawal of such member agency shall not
terminate such member agency's responsibility under
any obligation of such member agency or the
Authority or any action taken in connection
therewith, and further provided that the withdrawing
agency must pay to the Authority on the effective
date of withdrawal, all money owing to the
Authority, and as to those capital expenditures that
the withdrawing agency has agreed to participate in
by contract or otherwise, its share of such capital
expenditures. Such financial obligations of such
withdrawing agency may be assumed by another entity
upon 2/3 vote of the Board, absent the participation
of the representative of the withdrawing agency.
2. Notwithstanding Subsection 1, above, a member shall
not be permitted to withdraw from the Authority
unless the Board determines by majority vote, absent
the participation of the representatives of the
withdrawing agency, that as of the effective date of
withdrawal the Authority will have a waste stream
sufficient to meet all Authority operating expenses
and obligations outstanding as of the effective date
of withdrawal, whether capital, operational,
maintenance related or otherwise, and to ensure that
all Authority operations will not be adversely
affected to a material extent by the withdrawal of
the withdrawing member.
3. The withdrawing agency shall also continue to be
liable for its share of Authority obligations
including, but not limited to operations and
maintenance costs and the General Budget until the
effective date of its withdrawal.
E.
Expulsion of Member: The Board may, by. 2/3 vote of the
Board members, terminate a member agency's membership in
the Authority for a material breach of this Agreement
after a six (6) months notice to such member agency. A
member agency so expelled shall be responsible for
capital expenditures and non capital obligations of the
Authority as set forth in Article 4, Section C above.
- 10 -
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
F. Reinstatement: An agency, subsequent to its
withdrawal, or subsequent to expulsion, may seek
reinstatement as a Member of the Authority. Application
for reinstatement shall be made in writing to the Board.
An agency shall be reinstated upon a 2/3 vote of all
members of the Board as then constituted. The Board may
require an agency seeking reinstatement to meet any terms
and conditions which the Board deems appropriate.
G. Division of Property and Obligations on Dissolution:
Upon dissolution of the Authority as a legal entity, all
debts and obligations of the Authority, including all
bonded indebtedness, shall be paid, and the remaining
property of the Authority shall be divided in proportion
to the contributions made among all of the agencies who
are parties to this Agreement at the time of its dissolu-
tion.
H. Commitment of Waste Stream: Authority members shall,
to the extent they are not prohibited from doing so by a
contractual or legal obligation undertaken prior to
becoming members of the Authority, commit the entirety of
their wasts stream to any facility owned or operated by
the Authority provided such facility is designed and
constructed to accommodate the waste stream from the
affected member agency and provided further that such
member agency has agreed to participate in the project
which includes the operation of such facility.
Authorization to commit less than the entirety of the
waste stream 'of a member agency, other than for reason of
prior contractual obligation, shall be determined by the
Board based on economic, geographic and other solid waste
considerations keeping in mind the purpose of the
Authority.
I. Acceptance of Waste Stream: The Authority must accept
the entirety of the waste stream of any member agency to
the extent the Authority owns or operates solid waste
handling facilities designed and constructed to accommo-
date the waste stream from the affected member agency and
the facility or facilities have adequate capacity to
serve the member agency's entire need. The Authority
shall attempt to acquire, construct and/or operate Author-
ity facilities in such a manner as to best accommodate
the solid waste handling needs of all member agencies.
J. Funding From Member Agencies: Subject to Article 1,
Section D, each member agency shall provide its share of
the Authority's general budgetary obligation. Each
initial member's share is set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference and made a
part hereof as if fully set forth herein.
K. Liability The tort liability of the Authority, all
members of the Board, and all officers and employees of
- 11
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
said Authority shall be controlled by the provisions of :�
Division 3.6 of Title I of the Government Code of the
State of California. Any tort and contractual liability
incurred by or imposed upon the "Authority" shall remain
the sole liability of the Authority rather than the
liability of the member agencies, to the full extent such
allocation of liability is permitted by law. The
provisions of said Division relating to the
indemnification of public employees and the defense of
actions against them arising out of any act or omission
occurring within the scope of their employment shall
apply to all Authority directors, officers and
employees. Notwithstanding the specific terms of this
section, the Authority and the member agencies shall
retain the power to allocate liability between the
Authority and the member agencies, or among the member
agencies, in a manner other than as set forth above
pursuant to written agreement to do same for specific
projects or undertakings of the Authority.
L. Term and Termination: This Agreement shall continue in
force until terminated as specified by this section.
This Agreement may be terminated at the and of any Fiscal
Year by consent of all member agencies, however, this
Agreement and the Authority shall continue to exist for
the purpose of disposing of all claims, the distribution
of assets, and any other functions necessary to conclude
the affairs of the Authority. Upon termination, payment
of the obligations and division of the property of the
Authority shall be conducted pursuant to Section F of
this Article.
ARTICLE 5: PROJECT FINANCING
A. Separate Contracts: Financing of specific capital
projects, such as the acquisition or construction of
solid waste facilities by the Authority shall be subject
to separate contracts between the Authority and member
agencies which intend to participate in the specific
facility, the contracts shall set forth each agency's
responsibility for capital expenditures and operating
expenses as well as such other terms as may be
appropriate.
B. Debt: The Authority may issue or cause to be issued
bond and other indebtedness, and pledge any property
and/or revenues as security to the extent permitted by
law. Any and all debts, liabilities, and obligations
incurred by or imposed upon the Authority shall be the
debts, liabilities, and obligations solely of the Authori-
ty, rather than the debts, liabilities, and obligations
of the individual member agencies.
12
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
C. Financial Contribution: For agencies joining the Au-
thority after the effective date of this Agreement, the
Board shall determine such agencies' proportionate finan-
cial contribution, which is due upon joining the Authori-
ty.
D. g'y,nd It is intended that the liabilities of the
Authority, to the fullest extent possible, are funded by
revenues generated by facility operations.
ARTICLE 6: EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY'S POWERS
This Agreement is entered into under the provisions of Arti-
cle 1 of Chapter 5, Division 7, Title One of the Government
Code concerning Joint Powers Agreements. As to those powers
vested in the Authority pursuant to Section 6508 of the Gov-
ernment Code, they shall be exercised in the same manner and
subject to the same restrictions as those applicable to a
sanitary district pursuant to the statutes and laws of the
State of California.
ARTICLE 7: OBLIGATIONS OF AUTHORITY
Any and all debts, liabilities, and obligations incurred by
or imposed upon the Authority shall be the debts, liabili-
ties, and obligations solely of the Authority and no capital
or administration debt, liability, or obligation shall there-
by be imposed upon any party to this Agreement or the collec-
tive parties hereto.
Dated: r/,/q0 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA
SANITARY DISTRICT
President
Board of Directors
S 4ary
B&ird of Directors
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
r
4CU
District Counsel
13
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
Dated: CITY OF SAN RAMON
Mayo
w. City C4erk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Citl Counsel
Dated: / .90 CITY OF WALNUT CREEK
-Mayor
* 0 A �2dr A.0 A -4
Cy lerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Counsel
14
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement/CCC Solid Waste Authority
DATE: ��/3
REgUEST To SPEAK FoRm
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) I
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: --ITU E-�J PHONE: S I
ADDRESS: 629 ! G]L0 (AL l-F-- -.!ls L V1 ! CITY: _I,t,G-
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: NAME OF ORGANIZNTION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # �o
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
y
DATE:
REgUMT TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) a
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
J
NAME: / 0 Z-3 PHONE:
ADDRESS: CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: NAME OF ORGANIZIXTION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # Z, �
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: _ / 3
REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM
THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT �p
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: I-AXe 00V PHONE: I S�� 1713
ADD REss: AUC-421' 1`1-13r3 Of V5, Cny:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
NAME OF ORGAN17-10 N)
Check one:
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 3
My comments will be: general _Y_ for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST To SPEAK FORM
(`THREE, (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: -1 A A PHONE:
ADDRESS: -40 Crry:
I wn speaking formyself OR organization:
(NAME OF ORGAN17-\TION)
Check one:
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 57 2.3
My comments will be: general V" for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST To SPEAK FoRm
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: PHONE:
ADDRESS. Pal CITY.
I 'am speaking formyself OR organization: f
�((NNAAE OF OR . I7.�TIOtif `
Chi ejkone:
V .
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general- for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments Ifor the Board to consider.
DATE: 9�l 3 1�
REQUEST To SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) 7
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: /Lf�/9 /� ,/r/r7��1 s PHONE: MU
ADDRESS: 32:1�0 Ott CITY: dVY1=vetl�
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Chec one: (NAME OF ORGANI7.a1'ION) `� �j
VQIA—
'h7e�c 'h
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # .3
My comments will be: general _/ for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete s rm and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
I
addressing c oar
NAME: y //J PHONE:
ADDRESS: -J Z c--/<,- Cny:
this ill
I am speaking formyself OR organization: (NAME OF ORGAN17,NTION)
Ch 7 one:
ec
I wish to speak on Agenda item #
My comments will be: general X for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: '�71
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board. G
NAME: h rc% PHONE:
ADDRESS:I CITY: 'V
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION)
- I wish to speak on Agenda Item # .
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on thes4 ect of
'' � I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: IrY �7." IL
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the o d.
NAME:, 1 PHONE.
ADDRESS: S3 CITY:
o'�
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: (NAME of ORGAN[Z-XTION)
I wish to speak.on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of �Q
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST To SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: INiA v` PHONE: 73
ADDRESS: 1 0 V-P- CITY: —�-
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
(NAME OF ORGA!VlTM'IOti)
Check one:
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: �J?
RE+,gtTEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: PHONE:
ADDRESS: I 7 ?9 T , /"!1/,>-rSJZ11e6-- _ CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
. (INANE OF ORGANflal'lOti)
Check one:
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # `• 3
My comments will be: generale for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
BRUEN & GORDON
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
1990 NORTH CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD
SUITE 608
WALNUT CREEK,CALIFORNIA 94596
(5 10)295-3131
FAX(510)295-3132
September 12, 1994 RECEIVED
SEP 1 3 1994
CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Chairman Tom Powers and CONTRA COSTA-00
Members of the Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Proposed Keller Canyon Disposal Agreement
Dear Chairman Powers and
Members of the Board of Supervisors:
The Keller Canyon Landfill Company and BFIC, Inc. (both
subsidiaries of Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. )
offer to enter into a solid waste disposal agreement with the
County for a seventeen month term at a combined disposal rate for
both the Permanent Transfer Station and the Keller Canyon Landfill
of $39. 00 per ton.
The language of this agreement would be simplified compared
with that considered by the Board in June, since the term. of the
agreement would be for approximately a year and a half. This
proposal is not contingent on any settlement of the Acme CERCLA
litigation, nor is it contingent on any action the Board may take
on County disposal fees and taxes.
The following is a brief summary of several principal terms of
the proposed agreement.
* The agreement is for the period which would commence on
County approval of the agreement and terminate in April,
1996.
* The $39. 00 per ton rate does not include County and State
taxes and fees. These would be added on to arrive at a
total "gate rate" at the Permanent Transfer Station.
* BFI would provide the County an indemnity (in the form
previously negotiated with County Counsel) for CERCLA and
related environmental liabilities for solid waste
disposed of under the agreement.
Chairman Tom Powers and
Members of the Board of Supervisors
September 12, 1994
Page 2
* The agreement would contemplate a wastestream commitment
by the County of the unincorporated area not already
committed to the West County transfer station (IRRF) .
This same proposal has been and will be made to other cities
and sanitary districts in the County.
We would welcome any suggestions or comments the Board of
Supervisors or County Counsel/Staff have with respect to this
proposal. If you would like a copy of the proposed agreement,
please contact the undersigned and we would be happy to provide you
with a copy.
Very truly yours,
Thomas M. Bruen
TMB:dcr
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFF/CE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
Date: September 12, 1994
C:.^.N1=1DEN i IAL
To: Supervisor Tom Powers, District I
From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel
Re: Franchising Permanent Acme Transfer Station and Keller Canyon Landfill Site
and Related Issues
This is in response to your inquiries concerning the above-noted subject. Your
slightly rewritten inquiries and our responses thereto are as follows:
QUESTION NO. 1: An Acme-BFI representative has asserted that the U.S. Supreme
Court's Dolan case decision suggests some of the uses of the County's waste related fees
are improper and therefor unconstitutional. It was not clear which fees were being referred
to and it may be a good idea to discuss this subject with that representative.
RESPONSE NO. 1: This office contacted the appropriate Acme-BFI representative
who indicated the concern was primarily over what the Board may do with respect to the
Acme Franchise. Regarding the use of fees, concerned was indicated about the use of
Recourse Recovery monies collected from Keller ($300,000 plus per year) and Acme
($100,000 plus per year) being used to fund recycling market development zone activities
and related matters outside of the collector areas from which waste was being or would be
received through the transfer station and to the Keller Canyon site.
The Acme Transfer Station LUP 2122-86 (approved in 1987 and amended in 1990)
provides in its condition No. 12.9 that when the County requests, the Transfer Station
owner shall provide annual funding not to exceed $100,000 (at 1987 levels) to the County
for County Resource Recovery Management Program funding. Keller Canyon Landfill LUP
2020-89 (approved 7-24-90) provides in its section 31.9 that when directed by the County
the operator shall impose a tonnage surcharge to support the County's Resource Recovery
Management Program not to exceed $100,000 at 1987 levels) and section 35.4 provides
that the operators shall pay a $200,000 annual fee for the County's Resource Recovery
Program beginning 7-1-90. Section 35.4 expressly provides that this $200,000 fee may be
reconsidered as part of a franchise agreement.
CONFIDENTIAL
Supervisor Powers 2 September 12, 1994
Government Code section 65907 provides that any legal action shall be commenced
within 90 days after the approval of a land use permit to attack the legality and
reasonableness of any conditions attached to the involved permit. After 90 days, all
persons are barred from such actions or proceedings concerning the invalidity or
unreasonableness of such conditions. As noted above, both of the involved land use
permits were approved substantially in excess of 90 days prior to this date and it now
appears that the permittees would be barred by the provisions of 65907 from contesting
the reasonableness and legality (constitutionality, etc.) of the subject County Resource
Recovery Program fee provisions requirements. Of Course, Acme and/or BFI may
question whether these funds are being spent for the said Resource Recovery
Management Program or some other clearly unrelated and distinct activity. We are not
aware of any specific allegation in this regard having been made to this date. Also, we are
not aware of any specific request made by Acme or BFI that these fees be adjusted in
some manner and their expenditure reviewed so that the benefit of the fees is directed to
the collector areas from which waste is received.
QUESTION NO. 2: Can the County impose a $4 non-compensatory franchise fee on
the Acme Permanent Transfer Station and then spend these proceeds generally in the
amount of $2.00 for local host mitigation and $2.00 to fund certain attorney fees and/or
closure cost.
RESPONSE NO. 2: Yes, subject to the following discussion. Condition 15.4 of the
Acme Transfer Station LUP 2122-86 provides that the transfer station shall be subject to
the requirement of a franchise agreement if the Board decides to franchise the facility and
that the franchise agreement may require the Transfer Station owner to pay franchise fees.
As noted in Response No. 1, the statute of limitations provided by Government Code
section 65907 to challenge this requirement ran several years ago. Of course, the LUP
condition does not specify the possible amount of the franchise fees and does not specify
that the franchise fees may included a noncompensatory general fund revenue fee. For
this reason and assuming a noncompensatory franchise fee is required, there may be an
opportunity for the transfer station operator to attempt at this time to challenge (or more
likely attempt to encourage someone else to sue or raise the issue) whether the County
can impose a noncompensatory revenue franchise fee on the Acme Transfer Station. We
have attempted to mitigate this risk by provisions in the proposed franchise agreement
requiring the transfer station owner and operator to agree not to challenge such a fee
provision and to defend against anyone so challenging it.
As has been confidentially discussed in the past with Board members, there is no
—..express statutory authority in California providing that general law counties may require
noncompensatory general revenue fees as part of a franchise agreement with a solid
waste disposal site operator or transfer station owner. In addition, there are a number of
general law cities and sanitary districts in similar circumstances who do require
noncompensatory franchise fees. Because a court of record have not yet addressed the
extent of authority of general law counties, cities and sanitary districts in this area, we
Supervisor Powers 3 September 12, 1994
have always endeavored to structure the processing of these types of entitlements (LUPs,
etc.) so that any apparent statute of limitations would quickly bar the possible objections
noted above.
Finally, as emphasized above, Condition 15.4 of Acme's LUP 2122-86 only provides
for a franchise fee "if the Board of Supervisors decides to franchise" the transfer station.
To date, the Board has not decided to approve and franchise the permanent transfer
station which the Community Development Department has indicated is close to
completion.
QUESTION NO. 3 (YOUR NO. 4): Does condition 21.2 of the Keller LUP No. 2020-
89 require amendment to the LUP before rate deregulation can occur?
RESPONSE NO. 3 : First, it would appear the correct reference is to condition 12.1
of the Keller Canyon Landfill LUP 2020-90 and not 21.2. Condition 12.1 generally states
that the Board shall approve all rate changes and that rates established by the Board will
be not only be maximum rates but also minimum rates. As previously indicated, it is our
view that the Board can adopt a minimum zero rate and still be in compliance with this
LUP condition. But, to remove any possible ambiguity about this question, I understand
that the Keller LUP amendments coming to you later this month will also include a
modification (or for the most part) elimination of condition 12.1 from the current Keller
Canyon LUP.
INQUIRY NO. 4(YOUR NO. 5) & RESPONSE NO. 4: Here you ask a number of
questions about Keller Canyon landfill operators compliance with condition 19.3 concerning
the County Household Hazardous Waste Program. I understand the Community
Development Department may also be preparing a response to this area of concern.
While Condition 19.3 states the operator will develop a program, it also (later in its
text) requires the operator to implement whatever household hazardous materials program
is approved by the County's Board of Supervisors. I assume (because I have not been
able to completely verify it) that the household hazardous waste program developed and
implemented by the County's Health Department was approved in some manner by the
Board of Supervisors. If this is the case, then it would appear that Condition 19.3 was
generally complied with as to the development of a household hazardous waste program.
I have not been advised that the household hazardous materials waste program developed
by the County Health Department and upon which substantial amounts of the fees
generated from the Keller and Acme operations have been spent was done without Board
approval.
A further inquiry is did Keller (or Acme) violate its LUP when it failed to pay the $2.12
per ton tipping fee from September 1993 to May 1994. Staff representatives of the Health
Department have indicated to this office that Keller has always promptly paid its required
household hazardous waste program fee for direct haul waste, without rate adjustment, or
Supervisor Powers 4 September 12, 1994
requesting a rate adjustment. We've been further advised that only the Acme interim
transfer station did not pay this fee during the period in question under the "impression"
that it no longer had to pay this specific fee. This was a failure to comply with the
provisions of Condition 19.3. As you are aware, there is some uncertainty as to whether
staff with some arguable apparent authority may have participated in the creation of this
"impression" upon the part of the Acme operators. I have been recently advised by the
Community Development Department that Acme now is current in the payment of these
fees.
Finally, as noted above, the condition directs the landfill operator to develop a
program or allows the County to develop and direct the implementation of such program.
But it can be implied from the LUP conditions and by the County's later actions that the
operation of the program is or can be funded from charges made for utilization of the
Acme and/or Keller facilities. This program is a cost of operation and it is not clear why it
would be expected that the operator would provided it without funding from or charges at
the Acme and/or Keller facilities.
INQUIRY NO. 5(YOUR QUESTION 6): Does the County have the right to withhold its
franchising of the permanent Acme Transfer Station unless it dismisses its current litigation
against the County and other public agency defendants concerning the Acme Landfill site.
ANSWER NO. 5: In our view, the Acme Landfill site and the litigation concerning it is
legally distinct from the Acme Transfer Station. In 1987 (and again in 1990) when the
County was considering and approving the Acme Transfer Station LUP, it was processed
as an entitlement distinct from the landfill site and no amendment of the landfill site LUP
was required. Other than the current litigation concern, it is not clear why the 1987 and
1990 singular processing decisions were in error.
The Acme LUP 2122-86 has already been approved and there is no express
condition in it concerning compulsory funding of the cleanup of the historical Acme Landfill
site. There is an express condition (15.4) in it that if it is subject to a franchise agreement,
the agreement "may" allow the operators of Acme (at their discretion?) to collect charges
to contribute to the closure cost of a landfill which served the transfer station's service
area.
It appears to this office that the imposition of such a franchise litigation requirement
could subject the County to a serious civil rights action alleging that it is arbitrarily
preventing the establishment and operation of the permanent Acme Transfer Station
because of nonreasonably related circumstances (the "Dolan" case). Also, as already
noted, Condition 15.4 of the Acme LUP provides that the transfer station is only required to
obtain a franchise agreement if the Board of Supervisors decides to franchise the facility.
Since the Board of Supervisors has yet to approve any franchise agreement offer to the
Acme Transfer Station operator, it might be argued at some point that the Permanent
Transfer Station may become operational in the absence of a franchise agreement offer
Supervisor Powers 5 September 12, 1994
since the Board of Supervisors has yet to "decide to franchise the facility". Of course, a
valid argument can be made that Acme must obtain a franchise or other agreement prior
to permanent transfer station operation (Co.Ord. C. § 418-5.602) assuming no such
agreement has already been made.
If you have any questions concerning the foregoing, please advise.
VJW:df
-4w-mem-1: acme.m
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFF/CE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA
Dace: October 28, 1994
To: Board of Supervisors
From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel
Re: Franchise For Permanent Acme Fill Transfer Station
The Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1994 designated an ad hoc committee
(Supervisors Bishop and Smith) to met at 2:30 on October 27, 1994 to consider the
franchise agreement for the above-noted matter and the revisions made to the earlier
September 13, 1994 considered draft agreement as reflected in version of the agreement
presented to the Board on October 10, 1994. In attendance at this public meeting (in
addition to the two Supervisors) were two representatives from the Community
Development Department (Louise Aiello and Charles Zahn) the County Counsel, two
representatives of BFI (Tom Bruen and Dennis Fenton), an interested private attorney
(Rick Norris) and a Contra Costa Times reporter (Ariel Ambruster).
On October 27, the September 13, 1994 franchise agreement and the revisions to it
(as presented to the Board of Supervisors on October 10, 1994) were reviewed by utilizing
a September 20, 1994 draft showing strike out and overlay for insertions which this office
provided to facilitate that consideration. All references hereinafter made are to pages of
that September 20, 1994 draft of the subject franchise agreement. In the course of the
review of the franchise document, the following revisions to the September 13, 1994 draft
were focused on for further particular consideration:
1. Page 97, § 4.20 "Commitment of Transfer Station Waste." This section 4.20 is
a new provision added to the agreement that was before the Board on September 13,
1994. It appears that staff may have added this provision on its mistaken view that the.
Board had directed that any final agreement with BFI and Acme contain a requirement that
to the extent allowed by law waste coming to the Acme Transfer Station must thereafter go
to the Keller Landfill for disposal. BFI-Acme's representatives at the Thursday meeting
indicated that they have no objection to striking § 4.20 from this draft. Assuming that staff
misconstrued the Board of Supervisors' directions on September 13, 1994, § 4.20 may be
stricken.
Board of Supervisors 2 October 28, 1994
2. Page 18 and 19, § 6.2 "Surcharge." As indicated on attached pages 18 and 19,
the overlayed language contained within the parenthesis (at the bottom of page 18 and the
top of page 19) was added to this section and would establish an initial one-time two year
period in which the County could not increase the 25% surcharge but retained discretion to
reduce it during that period. Without this initial two year provision, the County under the
September 13th draft could (after providing 90 days advanced written notice) every two
years increase the surcharge percentage. Of course, even with this initial two year
provision, after the first two years the County could increase the 25% surcharge. During
the course of the Board's September 13th deliberation, no specific time period was
discussed but staff assumed that since under the first sentence of the September 13 draft
the surcharge percentage can only be changed once every two years that the Board did
not intend to change it within the first two years of first establishing it. For that reason, the
provision within the parenthesis was inserted. Assuming the staff incorrectly interpreted
the Board's intent on this point, the language within the parentheses can be directed to be
deleted. BFI-Acme's representatives indicated that they object to a deletion of the two
year language contained within the parenthesis.
3. Pages 19 and 20, § 6.4 "Initial Surcharge." In the September 13th draft
presented to the Board for this § 6.4, there were three surcharge arrangements proposed
for Board of Supervisors consideration. None of these three alternatives were individually
accepted by the Board. Based upon what staff believed were the Board's September 13
determinations, revised § 6.4 was developed as indicated on attached pages 19 and 20.
During the course of the committee's Thursday consideration, it appeared that there was
general consensus that revised § 6.4 appeared to generally reflect the Board's September
13th action with the following exception. Section 6.4b "Funding of Programs from
surcharge" has been interpreted by staff and BFI-Acme's legal representative that any
agreement defined mandated program fees could be established and levied at the Board's
direction in excess of the 25% surcharge. But since the term "mandated fees" does not
expressly appear within subsection b. of section 6.4, it was proposed and appeared to be
accepted by BFI-Acme that a sentence should be added to the end of this subsection b. as
follows:
"Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection or agreement,
any Board of Supervisors' directed mandated fees (including among
others any state fixed and required fee, local enforcement agency
established fee and AB939 fee) may at the Board's direction be
collected for the County in addition to any established surcharge
percentage."
Further concerning § 6.4a., a view was expressed during the Thursday meeting that
even with a 25% surcharge on the proprietary rate charged at the Acme Transfer Station,
this may not provide the amount of fees desired by the County for various programs
because of assumed factors such as a significantly lower Acme charge for use of the
transfer station or reduced operations. Though not expressly before the Board of
Board of Supervisors 3 October 28, 1994
Supervisors on September 13, it was proposed on Thursday that some consideration
should be given to providing in the franchise that should the 25 percent or other surcharge
rate fail to provide a specified annual minimum sum of money than BFI-Acme would be
obligated for a fixed dollar amount ($6,8,?) per ton handled. BFI-Acme representatives
indicated they could not agree at this time to that concept. No discussion was conducted
as to what minimum amount per ton might be appropriate.
4. Other Revisions. As noted, it appeared to staff on Thursday that as to the other
revisions made to the September 13 draft and before the Board on October 10, they
reflected the Board's September 13 directions. At your meeting on Monday, October 31,
1994, we will provide you with copies of the complete text of the Transfer Station franchise
agreement before you on September 13th and a complete copy of the strike out and
overlay revised September 20 version of it. It should be noted that the Committee on
Thursday give consideration to the Keller Landfill site franchise agreement which will be
reported to you at your meeting on November 1, 1994.
Finally, attached is a copy of an October 27, 1994 letter from Tom Bruen which
.states his client's position on the franchises current status.
VJW:df
attach.
by the County under this provision in accordance with Section
,( 11of this Agreement.
Section 4. 18 RECORDS. Operator shall keep separate and
accurate records for the Transfer Station as reasonably directed
by County for purposes of administering this Agreement.
The County may, at its own expense .(which may be recovered
as a Solid Waste program cost) , at any time during the term of
this Agreement, have the books and records of the Operator
examined for the sole purpose of verifying Operator's compliance
with the requirements of this Agreement. County shall give
thirty (30) days ' written notice to the Operator in advance of
such examination date.
Section 4 . 19 HOST COMMUNITY.
Eemit to the Gounty, a hest eemmunity mitigation fee in the
affigunt as part of the SUEGhaEge en all selld waste
delivered to the TEaas_€eESt-atlw n<.::;::;<.;>
:^:::.::.ii::i.iiiii`:'::Ciiii;ii}i....::•::�:::'.iiiii:•:iY.:::i:•iiiiii:i.::'.i:ii::.::.i:.i?iiiiii::is?^:^:?i::i:::::..n::::r::i:.:Y`::•::::::<'i:' i:•:;::..;F:�:.:i':,::i i::::'i:::i'i::i::i:::::ii:i':::i::i'L::�':.i:.i::'::i'::.:
::;}.: (�. �lKi::i'.: .:5::::i..' i .:}'i•.:.• .KR►.•I ..T1M .T�..::
•:.: :.::::: ...........X..:.:..... ^I,.,............::: ... ::: 11Nf.:..:.::::n...........:.............v...v.........::..::.:....... ..vv:.........:...v..............:.. ........,
......................................................................................................::.............:...............................................:..............................................................................
�' .. ....'..'�..::i:::.'�..r�::t::::•:::�'.:ii:::.�::i'i::::�:'::�yjt::Sii:i'?+::.-jaa:•:: iii:::i?i'ii...::.:i.:.::;.� i'.'�.1.'�.:y{�}��'��}.::::Ya:>.}��..�.�•�::::::::���':}Z'.:::i::::S::S:.:i:::'�'�'..::::::i. .i.�.�.��..•.�...'.�..i::i'i(iyyii�:.S>..:i.L:.':.��.:��.:•.::v�.�....�.,:{.M. .
'.::i�� �.:::�#f.::�� � 1M���M• � }� �.�M[ �K���.� .:n�;MIH.�.�l{�1TlT�.:t��.v:��.ti.
y�
�J1'i.�.S—ifi::.'::�::-��:::3:��:���v2:. ::2;;:;j'%:;: '.:.:.is': :;;: :::;.:::.::... v:^���4:i:1I.•.��l AF7A�i��#i?:�eti:� }%t�f:�'Ss ::::::�:{!►i r:
.....................
.................................................................................::.............:::::..........................................................................................................................
..................................
t
ARTICLE 5. PERFORMANCE OF COUNTY
Section 5. 1 GATE FEE COLLECTION SYSTEM. The computerized
September 20, 1994 -17- DRAFT
Gate Fee Collection System, which shall be provided by Operator
in accordance with Section 4 .6 of this Agreement, shall be
approved by the County, which approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld.
Section 5.2 INSPECTION OF SCALES. The County may, from
time to time during regular business hours, inspect the scales
and test the accuracy of same.
ARTICLE 6 . RATES
Section 6 . 1 PROPRIETARY RATE. Except as provided in Section
6.7, the Transfer Station Proprietary Rate shall be determined
and established by Operator at its sole discretion.
Notwithstanding section 4 . 11, it is understood that the Operator
need not charge a uniform Transfer Station Proprietary Rate to
all customers, but may vary the Transfer Station Proprietary Rate
as between different customers based on various factors
determined by Operator, including, but not limited to, the
quantity and type of waste delivered by each customer to the
facility and whether each customer has entered into an agreement
with the Operator in which the customer agrees to deliver some or
all of the customer's future waste stream to the Transfer
Station.
Section 6.2 SURCHARGE. The County may determine and
establish at least once every two years, effective on the date
...........................................................................................
determined by the Board of Supervisors, <> ....; :<» ,
. iyts . et Pg .thca .
September 20, 1994 -18- DRAFT
e; a Obi f4. t the Surcharge, which shall be added to the then
applicable Transfer Station Proprietary Rate, and collected as
part of the Gate Rate. Operator will be provided at least ninety
(90) days written notice of any newly established Surcharge. In
the absence of the County establishing a particular Surcharge
amount, the Surcharge to be collected by the Operator for the
County shall be thirty percent (30%) of the then applicable
Transfer Station Proprietary Rate.
Section 6.3 GATE RATE. The Gate Rate shall consist of the
ON
e e Surcharge
ur
Rate Mandat d Fees, S c
and disposal costs.
Section 6 .4 INITIAL SURCHARGE.
#911000 OWEffective on the effective date of this
Agreement, the Surcharge shall be
` ' .
;....... ::.:::.;.;:.;:...;:.;
he<:<: b ... ...... ..a1....s c .. ...... . s.... .... . ..... u ..
AW
do IV
ism
ua
IPA
. ? .. ,cd..... .te u� + d::;
;:::.:::::::.�::...:.::::::;:::-.i>:,.,:w;:..>i>:.;>:� .: {,.,1� {� �w v� �y�w y �y wry
'1t:r: ::::::` ':4"� .......+.... i:...:...�.......Jr.54....e!.a4:.....4!,. .����....���....�1t�i.�Q��.�n.4i..":e.:7
...........:.........
t
>: #? 1 Al
>:r«`. .....
September 20, 1994 -19- DRAFT
.......:.:::.::. :.;
...................
: ad:::pins..:. n ... q... #Gide :: :::: td... .::: u
................ .......
c , osS,dei« .; p .# t � a. .,as
:::::::::g.::::::::::::.:::.:::..::X::..:.:.:..::::::.::::::.:.::::::::. .:.:::::. :.::.::::.:.. .
Vii:; Agy] .�yac..::ay: t +pd. : : : .x.;:;.: + t : ::�:::.: :.:.:. : :: t,. a : .�:.::::
:4 :0.0.
Section 6.5 CONTRACTS. For all contracts entered for the
delivery to and receipt of Solid Waste at the Transfer Station,
the Surcharge applicable at the time of the contract shall apply
for the term of said contract. The parties agree that any later
established surcharge amounts shall not apply to waste received
pursuant to such Solid Waste contract for the term of said
contract.
Operator shall advise County of any contract subject to the
privileges of this section immediately upon execution. Operator
shall provide County with any and all information requested by
County concerning any such Contract, including providing County
with copies of such contracts upon request.
Operator shall also provide to County upon request, copies
of all contracts for the transportation (hauling) and/or disposal
September 20, 1994 -20- DRAFT
1J-27-1994 12:48PM FROM TO 96461078 P.02
BRUEN & GORDON
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
1990 NORTH CALVORNIA uovLEvARO
Su/TQ 606
WALNUT CREEK,OALIMRNIA 94$96
49103 295-3031
FAX(5101 265.313?,
October 27, 1994
VI_FACSIMILE AND MAIL,
Victor Westman, Esq.
County Counsel
County of Contra Costa
651 Pine Street, 9th Floor
Martinez, California 94553
Re: BFI Permanent Transfer Station/Keller Canyon
Landfill Franchise Agreements
Dear Mr. Westman:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you that,
notwithstanding the purported resolution of the Board of
supervisors on Tuesday, October 25 concerning the franchise
agreement for the BFI Permanent Transfer. Station and the amended
Kellar Canyon Landfill franchise agreement, it is the position of
Browning-Ferris Industries that those agreements are in full
force and effect and constitute binding obligations of Contra
Costa County and BFI. We intend to meet with the ad hoc
subcommittee of the Board of Supervisors this afternoon at 2:30
p.m. and to attend the Board of Supervisors hearing Monday
morning to consider any request the County Board may wish to make
regarding proposed amendments to those agreements. However,
please be advised that in attending these meetings BFI in no way
waives its legal right to insist on full compliance by the County
with all terms and conditions of those existing franchise
agreements as approved by the Board on September 13, 1994.
Very truly yours,
Thomas M. Bruen
TMB:j c f
cc: Mr. Dennis Paul Fenton
TOTAL P.02
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: August 17, 1994
i
TO: Val Alexeeff, Director, GMEDek
FROM: Belinda Smith,"Senior Planner
i
SUBJECT: INFORMATION ON RATES FOR THE ACME INTERIM TRANSFER
STATION AND THE ACME LANDFILL
I
Summary
This is in response to your request, on behalf of Supervisors Torlakson and smith, for
information on rates for the Acme Interim Transfer Station (Acme ITS), the amortization of the
Acme ITS investment capital, and disposal at the Acme Landfill.
1. We understand that the amortization of investment capital for the Acme Interim Transfer
Station, through the Acme ITS rates, concluded in December 1993. The per ton cost
included for amortization remains in the rates but most likely has been offset by C.P.I.,
fuel costs, worker compensation, the recent increase in Household Hazardous Waste
(HHW) Fee and other associated costs.
2. The Transfer Station rate structure was developed in 1989, at the time emergency export
to other counties began. Due to settlement efforts for closure/post closure funding of the
Acme Landfill, Acme and the County have not requested adjustments to the Acme ITS
rates.
3. The County does not have mechanisms in place to rate regulate the Acme Landfill.
Acme Landfill has charged "transfer station rates" since 1989. Acme Landfill has also
charged a gate surcharge of$8.63 to all customers, except franchise haulers, per Board
of Supervisors approval.
4. Stage 1 of the Acme Permanent Transfer Station has been completed. The transfer
facility could begin operation on September 7, 1994.
On June 7, 1994 the Board of Supervisors eliminated the floor on the rates for the Keller
Canyon Landfill and the Acme ITS. Provided below is a summary based on file information:
a brief description related to direction by the Board of Supervisors on the Acme Landfill and of
the rate setting history of the Acme ITS. More detailed information on the Acme Landfill and
1
rate setting can be obtained from County Counsel.
Overview: Disposal at the Acme Landfill
Supervisor Smith's question related to the rates currently charged by the Acme Landfill and how
those rates were established. The County does not rate regulate the Acme Landfill. Previous
to Keller Canyon Landfill, franchises and rate regulation were not included as conditions of land
use permits. The rates historically set at the landfills were a reflection of market demand, but
beginning in the early 1980s were driven by regulatory requirements.
In January of 1989, in response to new closure laws and regulations, Acme raised its rates from
$25 a ton to $41 a ton to collect funds for closure. This action appeared as an item before the
Board of Supervisors on April 11, 1989. The Board of Supervisors requested Acme not to make
any rate changes to the rates until the completion of a study by Touche-Ross on Acme Fill
closure/post-closure cost justification and payment means. On August 15, 1989 the Board of
Supervisors referred to the City/County Memorandum of Understanding Committee on Export
the issues of assessment and collection of closure/post-closure. The Revised November 28, 1989
Touche Ross report on the Interim Transf,;r Station Policies and Rate Review stated that the
County had elected to assess each city proportional to its use of the landfill through the
franchised hauler. It also stated that closure/post closure, and if applicable, landfill costs would
be reported with the Acme ITS rate application. The Board of Supervisors subsequently adopted
the Touche Ross recommendations. It should be noted that Condition of Approval 15.4 of the
Acme Transfer Station Land Use Permit allows for closure/post closure costs to be collected
through the transfer station.
When the County started export of MSW to the Potrero Hills and Altamont Landfills, the rate
established at the Acme ITS became the rate Acme Fill Co. charged for disposal at the Acme
Landfill. The chronology of the rates at the Acme ITS is summarized below. Essentially, a
lower price charged for disposal at the Acme Landfill could have resulted in cities or haulers
demanding the lower rate.
Rate Overview: Acme Interim Transfer Station
Supervisor Torlakson's inquiry related to amortization of investment capital and' if it was
included in the current rate. The last rate review of the Acme ITS occurred on November 24,
1992. At that time the amortization period was extended from June 1993 to December 1993.
The rate set included amortization of$1.16 per ton. It is our understanding that the ITS is now
paid-off. However, there are several other factors now affecting the rate that offset the
continued collection of the per ton cost of amortization. Those factors include adjustment to
CPI, increases in fuel cost, worker compensation, the recent increase in HHW fee (from $.41
to $2.12), etc. which would be considered in current and future rate reviews.
Rate Review Chronology
2
v
The Acme Interim Transfer Station started operations in December of 1989 as a requirement of
emergency export to Alameda and Solano Counties. The initial rate set for the Acme Interim
Transfer Station was approved on December 5, 1989 for $52.22 per ton. The rate methodology
set a 31 month amortization for the ITS. The cost per ton of the amortization of invested capital
was $4.32 per ton. The operating ratio was set at 95%. The disposal rate (including mitigation
fees to Alameda and Solano Counties) included in the transfer station rate was for export to
Altamont Landfill and Potrero Hills Landfill. Although included in the Acme ITS rate
application, closure/post closure assessments for the Acme Landfill were not allowed as part of
the rate since other options were being explored at the time to handle closure fees. Since the
rate was based on projections prior to actual operations, the Board directed Acme to file a rate
application in time for a one year rate review. Other fees included in the rate were the per ton
AB 939 fee of$.95 and the LEA fee of$.25. The AB 939 fee had been imposed by Resolution
No. 89/738 on all disposal sites and transfer stations, including the interim station. The LEA
fee was already being collected at the landfills.
Acme disagreed on the operating ratio and the length of amortization. On January 16, 1990 the
Board of Supervisors reconsidered the Acme rate. The matter was deferred to January 23, 1990.
The Board did however, impose a gate surcharge of $8.63 per ton assessed to all customers.
except franchised haulers, at the Acme ITS. These customers pay a prorated rate of the per ton
fees plus $8.63. The Acme ITS rate approved by the Board of Supervisors applied to the
franchised haulers. Although not directly applicable to the Acme Landfill, the rate approved for
the Acme ITS was applied to Acme Landfill. Although unwritten it was important that Acme
not to make a distinction as to where waste was being landfilled since there were differences in
tip fee at the three landfills being used.
On January 23, 1990 the Board approved a change to the operating ratio and amortization of the
Acme ITS. The operating ratio was set at 93.4% and the amortization was extended to 37
months. The Board also reaffirmed the previously approved rate of $52.22.
As directed by the Board, Acme submitted a rate application for review proposed to be effective
January 1991. On December 18, 1990 the Board of Supervisors approved a rate of$59.68 to
be effective January 1, 1991. The rate increase was due to increased regulatory fees, operational
costs, lower than anticipated volumes, and hauling contract changes. The rate did not include
closure/post-closure surcharge for the Acme Landfill since a Pledge of Revenue Agreement for
historic Acme users was being reviewed by the Internal Operations Committee. Acme was also
directed to submit a mid-year rate application. A significant issue for future costs included put-
or-pay requirements at the receiving landfills and resulting revenue deficiencies (the Export
Agreements were sized to accommodate all Central County wastes, but not all was being sent
through the Acme ITS.
The export agreement with Alameda County ended December 1991. As of December 1991 the
cost of disposal for Altamont in Alameda County was $21.25 per ton tip fee plus $6.10
mitigation fee. The cost for disposal at Potrero Hills in Solano County was $23.15 per ton tip
fee and plus $8.25 mitigation fee. The rate used for disposal costs at the Acme ITS were a
3
Y
blended rate of Potrero and Altamont. The amount of tonnage being disposed at the Acme
Landfill was limited, approximately zero to 30-50 tons a day of hard to handle material while
both export agreements were in effect. The rate charged for the Acme Landfill was the same
rate as the transfer station, $59.22 per ton. Technically, all material passed through the transfer
station, from the transfer station floor waste was sent to Altamont, Potrero, or Acme.
On December 3, 1991 the Board of Supervisors approved a rate of$65.69 to be effective upon
approval. Acme ITS was also directed to submit a mid year rate application. It should be noted
that the rate recommended by Deloitte & Touche was $71.61.
In 1992 the rates were adjusted twice for the Acme ITS: the first occurred on May 12, 1992
in response to the tipping fee set for Keller Canyon Landfill which had just opened. A
subsequent rate was approved after the aforementioned rate review in November 1992. In both
instances fees for closure/post-closure were not allowed.
The rate set on May 12, 1992 for transfer and disposal at both Keller Canyon Landfill and
Potrero Landfill was $77.07 per ton. The change in rate was to adjust for the tip fees
established at Keller Canyon and to provide direction to Acme regarc:ing export to Potrero Hills
Landfill. Solano County had allowed accelerated disposal after the Altamont Agreement with
Alameda county expired in December, 1991. The Board directed Acme to limit the amount of
export to Potrero Hills Landfill to 242 tons per day to meet the minimum put or pay. At this
time the LEA fee was increased to $1.00 per ton and the Household Hazardous Waste Fee was
added at $.41 a ton. The Keller Canyon Landfill interim disposal rate was set at; $33.00 per
ton; County surcharge of $3.30 per ton; open space/ag, transportation, host community
mitigation fees at $2.00 each; and a $.75 State Eastin Fee. Solano County had raised the rates
at Potrero to $25.50 per ton tip fee and $9.65 per ton mitigation fee. The Solano County
franchise fee was unknown. Since the agreement with Solano County had not yet expired,
continuing export to Potrero allowed for a blended rate which lowered the overall rate.
The second rate adjustment occurred on November 24,1992. The rate set after a rate review
was $75.97 per ton. In the interim a rate at Keller was set for $38.40 per ton. The rate set was
based solely on the Keller Canyon Landfill disposal fee since the rate was effective after
termination of the inter-county agreement for export to Solano County. Export to Solano
County, under the agreement, stopped on December 8, 1992 when the tonnage cap was reached.
It was at this time the amortization of the capital cost of the Acme ITS was extended from May
of 1993 to December of 1993. Extending the amortization period for the Acme ITS reduced the
rate by $.73 per ton. The actual per ton amortization based on the extended time period, was
$1.16 per ton.
cc: Chuck Zahn, Community Development
Louise Aiello, Community Developement
County Counsel
4
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AUG 2 6 1994
GROWTH MANAGEMENT Af "O u L
NEZ CAALIF.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DATE: August 25, 1994
TO: Members-Board of Supervisors
FROM: Val Alexeeff, Dir
SUBJECT: Acme Fill Transfer Station
Recently a number of questions have been asked about Acme Landfill temporary transfer
station and permanent transfer station. Community Development staff worked with
County Council to provide answers. Please review the response. Previous answers have
prompted follow up questions so, if you have additional inquiry, please do not hesitate
to let us know.
VA:d
c:acmeques.t8
ATTACHMENT
cc: P.Batchelor,CAO
L Fujii, County Council
C.Zahn,Community Development
L Aiello,Community Development
S.Smith, Community Development
Dr.B. Walker,Health Services
It
Partial Text of item 2 . 3 from September 13 , 1994
Supervisor Bishop: I would like to respond to the $2 . 12 and then
some other comments . The $2 . 12 Household Hazardous Materials . I
think some months ago, it was represented to us by various cities
that they would assume that responsibility. I don' t think we can
decide that today. I think that is something that would factor
into our considerations however. I want to share with you again.
I hear and I can understand Mr. Aiello' s concern when the
expression by staff is we want to help BFI . I think one I don' t
know what was going on in someone' s mind when we wrote that, but
I think what we really want to do is two things . One, we want
the most important thing we want to get the rates in this county
down and that' s a bifurcated process that has to happen with
Keller. It has to Keller/Acme and it has to happen with us . I
think you know the comments by Miss Fanden and Mr. Schroder that
we do have a landfill that is state of the art . We want to keep
Keller viable and it is clear that the message has come out from
the cities . One of the other reasons frankly that I want us to
do something today is the Central County JPA and the cities
therein have asked us to do something today. And I didn' t hear
them wailing and screaming. I've heard them week after week,
month after month, asking us to do something about our rates and
I think we really have to act now. I am in concurrence with Miss
Fanden when she says she doesn' t think the issue is particularly
complex. I don' t think the issue is very complex. I think it is
numbers . I think there are policy issues that require working
out . As far as the mitigation fees . The six dollar mitigation.
The two and two for open space and transportation. That is
before the Planning Commission. I think there is legitimate,
there is merit for a mitigation fee. I think it is very
important . I am convinced it is a state of the art landfill but
at the same time, I don' t live next to the landfill and I think
we have to insure that there is something there that protects
those communities, that gives us a source of revenues to mitigate
those impacts . It may not be physical impacts . There are
intangible involved. I frankly wouldn' t want to live next to a
landfill . I think the preferable most people would say landfill
in Pittsburg. If they have a landfill we should compensate for
the intangibles inherent in having a landfill in their community.
I think that' s very important . I agree . I think you know I hear
BFI saying minimizing the risk involved as far as the valuation
is concerned but I think we do need to address that . And I think
if they are not very concerned about the risks that are involved
with the valuation, then maybe they bear the risk. Coming back
again to numbers and I must say there' s been no collusion here
but it' s interesting. I had some numbers in front of me . I look
at the $1 . 34 . That is not only a mandated fee but it is a fixed
fee . The remaining fees can go up and down. Some of them are
mandated but the amount is not mandated. I believe if we take
the $1 . 34 and we make a commitment to get the remaining part of
the fees down to $7 . 00 . And I want to assure Nancy Fanden that
that' s just not a number that we' re throwing out there . It' s a
number that I've given a good deal of thought to. The remaining
$7 . Right now we have an obligation for $212 . We have an
obligation for $1 . 00 on LEA. We have an obligation for $4 . 00
that the Planning Commission is going to look at tonight and
then, we have the additional $2 . 00 . Quite frankly, that does not
add up. I think there is no question in my mind that we can move
that $2 . 12 at some future point to the cities and to Central San.
That that can be moved at some point . I believe that what is
left out of the pie, there is a priority for mitigation, host
mitigation and if there' s someone that comes in on the short end
of the pie I think it' s going to have to be the County and its
franchise fee . I think the LEA fee if other counties can get by
with an administration, with a fee of . 09 in one county and .47
in another county and no AB 939 because they wrap it all in
together, I think we can do that as well . I think it is very
important for us to look at this in the context of what is
occurring now not historically. Now we have a proposal before us
,J 1
•i
that we could consummate today of $39 . 00 . I see $8 . 34 which I
think is reasonable and I think perhaps it becomes more
reasonable and there is a benefit to the County if that $2 . 12
goes to the cities, then we can look at that and going toward the
host mitigation, look at it going toward the franchise and I
think at this point, I have a question, can we simply say $7 . 00
without breaking out where that $7 . 00 can go and we wait to see
what happens with the Planning Commission but we can set what our
priorities are, that number one priority out of that remaining
$7 . 00 is host mitigation with what is remaining to be and then a
$2 . 12 that we have a commitment to, the remaining amounts go
toward the County and that the County will have a responsibility
out of that remaining amount for LEA and 939 . Other counties are
doing it that way and to me I'm not a genius at mathematics but I
do know that 100 percent or 50 percent of something or $8 . 34
percent, $8 . 34 as a portion on a ton is better than $16 . 00 which
is where we' re close to right now of 0 . $16 . 00 on 0 tonnage .
And I think that' s where I'm coming from. I would look for
support from the rest of the Board. I would prefer, I will make
that a motion. I look at the franchise agreement and on page 19
under 6 .4 . This is for the Landfill . Page 19 . That we set out
and I've looked over the alternatives, number one, two and three
which are, Jeff, very complex. To me, the 1 . 34 to the Eastin fee
with a $7 . 00 setting forth priorities that number one priority is
mitigation fee, second priority being the $2 . 12 that we are
. currently required to pay. The third level of priority being
those mitigation fees that are considered with the land use
permit and then the franchise fee so it' s incumbent upon us,
that' s the end of my motion, it' s incumbent upon us to move as
much as we can out of that $7 . 00 . The 2 . 12 . To reduce the
transportation and the open space if not eliminating it or
hopefully the Planning Commission will address that or maybe I'm
understanding from Mr. Zahn that we can consider that in a
different context . That it doesn' t necessarily have to be
involved with a land use permit .
Supervisor Powers : Did anybody write that motion down? You have
it on tape . Okay, well let' s see if we get a second.
Supervisor Bishop: The motion would be to reduce our mandated
fees and surcharge to be all inclusive with or at $8 .34 . $1 . 34
for the Eastin Fee, the remaining $7 . 00 to be allocated as
follows . Number one priority going toward mitigation, host
mitigation, the second being the $2 . 12 Household Hazardous Waste
which may be considered at some future point to be assumed by the
cities . The next tier would involve the transportation and open
space mitigation fees that are under the land use permit with the
final tier being a county surcharge or franchise out of which LEA
and AB 939 are paid.
Supervisor Powers : Is there a second to that motion?
Supervisor Smith: If I understand, that' s even more of a cut
than BFI is asking for, right?
Supervisor DeSaulnier: No.
Supervisor Smith: Because they' re saying $8 . 00 excluding the
State fees, right? $8 . 00 including the state fees?
Supervisor Bishop: I think it is exactly what they asked, Jeff,
because I was surprised I had it written down on my paper.
Tom Bruen: The suggestion made by one of the negotiators for the
Solid Waste Authority was $8 . 00 total on all County and State
fees .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, second to that motion? Hearing no
second, let me let' s try to clarify this thing that you gave us .
There are some changes across the board. $1 . 34 for the Eastin
2
fee is changed correct and that' s in all three counties . And
then in our County, we eliminated the $ . 80 for the 939 to the
cities already. So, that' s off . That would make a grand total
in fees for Contra Costa County of $13 . 79 . That' s what I
compute. I 'm trying to get feedback for you. Alameda County
would be $14 . 73 and Solano County would be $9 .46 with the
increased Eastin fee .
Supervisor Smith: Mr. Chair, can I ask some questions? I notice
Sue Rainey there and Herb from the JPA and I wanted to ask what
effect San Ramon' s actions will have on the future function of
the small JPA if somebody could answer that .
Answer: None.
Supervisor Smith: Nothing. So, am I misunderstanding then that
San Ramon' s going to franchise separately for San Ramon and then
the JPA' s going to franchise differently or in a separate
situation.
Answer: From audience. The actions taken by San Ramon and
direct by Solid Waste. . . .was taken under the current existing
franchise agreement . . . .
Supervisor Smith: So, that' s just for 16 months . And the
franchise that the small JPA is considering is to take over after
that 16 months this time. Correct . Okay.
Supervisor Powers : I wrote down some issues and so we can begin
trying to vote yes together, I thought I would take begin with
the simple issues that have arisen. One is that Mr. Bruen asked
to have ACME a party to the Keller Franchise agreement . Is that
a problem. Mr. Bruen asked to have ACME a party to the Keller
Franchise agreement, didn' t you ask that?
Vic Westman: No, BFI would still be a party in effect and would
still be responsible . . . .
Supervisor Powers : Maybe you can clarify that . I didn' t
understand what you said Tom. Didn' t sound like a big issue but .
Tom Bruen: No, it was not to the Keller Franchise, it was the
permanent transfer station franchise. Because they' re the
landowner, it made sense to obligate themselves to the franchise
and not just obligate the tenant but rather obligate both.
Supervisor Powers : Is there a problem. . .
Supervisor Smith: That' s a great idea. I move that .
Supervisor Powers : Okay. Motion and a second to add that . Is
there any discussion. Hearing none, all in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye . Passes unanimously. And provide in the
Keller Franchise agreement some provision to implement the
valuation issue, that' s the least controversial one that I could
find next in order. Is there some . . .
Supervisor Torlakson: I would move to direct staff to add
language and make it a BFI obligation if it' s a cost . . .
Victor Westman: Well, first of all, could I indicate staff has
not completely failed. The franchise does say that the
franchisee will comply with all the conditions of the land use
permit unless they' re varied somehow and the land use permit does
have a condition that says when the program is adopted by the
Board, the landfill operator shall comply and fund it in the
manner specified by the Board. So, I mean we have covered it in
that sense .
Supervisor Powers : Do you think that' s strong enough to get the
3
message across or would it be better if . . .
Victor Westman: Well, if you wish we can certainly provide in
there they' ll fund it but I think it has to be appreciated that
that will be a cost that will somehow be passed on. And I'm not
arguing against the condition, but I think there' s sort of a
misconception. You dropped out of rate regulation. Therefore,
they will add that I'm sure at some point to their cost if that
is a cost and you will remember if you were still engaging in
rate regulation, you have to insure that you provide a rate that
is not confiscatory, therefore that would be an item that would
be reflected in determining the cost for a rate .
Supervisor Smith: I think it' s important from looking through
what happened before I got here . It was clearly the
understanding I think from at least reading the paperwork that
when rate review happened if there was some valuation detriment ,
that was required to be paid, it would be included in the
proprietary side of the scale and set by the Board in order to
pay back those people who lost value. And so it seems to me we
should at least make it clear that the County is not going to set
another fee in order to pay for that and that the repayment that
is due based on the valuation study is considered by the Board to
be a cost of doing business .
Supervisor Powers : That' s a second.
Supervisor Torlakson: That was my motion and I think it' s
important to get that clarified because if we are in a
competitive rate environment, that leaves with the language Mr.
Westman read, and I'm glad we have that for the record, but it
leaves an uncertainty an open endedness to the issue . Where the
motion that I made and that Jeff' s clarified so well would pin
that number down so it' s not an uncertaintied variable that
different cities have to look at . Well maybe we' ll get hit with
you know some kind of new fee sometime in the middle of any kind
of term of a waste commitment or a wastestream rate allocation.
Supervisor Powers : Let me just get if there' s a motion and
speakers, you made the motion to include it as a part of the
proprietary rate and you second that . Okay, go ahead.
Supervisor Bishop: I have problems with that because I'm
listening to Mr. Westman' s co you know the language sounds like
we' re adding another indefinable here and there is a point which
we can define it and I think the part that there' s uncertainty is
over our fees not over this element of our fees . I think if we
would you read the last part of that again for me, Vic, because
it sounds to me it' s like at some future we will agree depending
upon the appropriateness of who bears the cost . I think the
appropriate of who absorbs the cost kind of is contingent on what
the actual amount is and as a cost of doing business if we' re
talking about $39 . 00 instead of $77 . 00, the ability and word you
used was confiscatory, there' s a potential for being
confiscatory, if we inject that as well as fees that are in my
mind excessive, so we' re combining excessive fees with having
them bear the total burden of this cost as well .
Victor Westman: If I understand what Supervisor, I think the
point Supervisor Torlakson was making, if I understand it
correctly, is that whenever that amount is determined, it will
not be borne within the County, whatever $7, $12 or $13 and it' ll
be the responsibility of the operator to fund that either through
the proprietary rate or otherwise is that correct .
Supervisor Torlakson: Yes .
Supervisor Smith: Right . And since we' re not regulating rates,
they can increase their proprietary rate to pay for that but of
course that' s a business judgement they will have to make .
4
Supervisor Powers : Okay, we understand the motion. All in favor
of the motion, signify by saying aye. Those opposed. Passes
unanimously. Okay, we did that . Did the request . There was
some concern about the providing in the franchise agreement for
Keller that at some point in time the Board be able to impose the
$2 . 00 ag and transportation fee which we are recommending be
suspended at this point in time to the Planning Commission but
that and you' d raised that Tom, is there desire to add anything
to that franchise agreement to insure that it' s not only in the
land use permit but also in the franchise agreement which is the
arrangement that regulates fees .
Supervisor Torlakson: I think some reference in the franchise
agreement would be appropriate . I think there' s a major question
that I don' t have answered yet in my own mind and I need
Counsel' s guidance on it and the benefit of the public hearing
process at the Planning Commission as to whether it' s appropriate
to take those out of the LUP or to restructure them in some other
way that guarantees nonetheless that the community would still
receive the $6 . 00 that they have currently received as
mitigation. So, how that' s best done, I'm not exactly sure and
what the best mechanism for that .
Victor Westman: Well, if I remember correctly the LUP requires
that $2 . 00 for open space and $2 . 00 for transportation be paid
and there isn' t any discretion to vary that at this point and
when this matter does come back to you, you're going to have the
discretion to amend the Land Use Permit and that discretion could
be that the fees will be whatever you fix them to be for those
two items but not to exceed $2 . 00 per ton or its equivalent . I
mean that discretion will be available to you when that comes
back if it' s next week.
Supervisor Powers : So, the idea would be to put a provision in
there that we reserve the right to do it in the franchise
agreement if it' s varied in the land use permit .
Victor Westman: Well, the land use permit will still provide
that those fees will be paid but at the amount you specify by
some subsequent action, either in the franchise agreement or some
other way. Part of I think your endeavor here though is at some
point to fix the total parameter of what all these costs are
going to be for certainty for the operator but to answer Tom' s
question, you' re going to have the discretion next week or the
week after. You don' t have to eliminate the ability to collect
those fees completely from the LUP. You can simply give the
Board discretion to be able to charge less than $2 . 00 a ton and
that discretion will be exercised either as part of the if you so
chose the franchise agreement whenever you fix the total amount
of fees whatever they' re going to be for that .
Supervisor Powers : So, is one of the alternatives in the
franchise agreement sufficient to cover that .
Victor. Westman: Yes, well we do say we can add something but I
think we also at some point before we can finalize writing all
that, we have to know what you finally do.
Supervisor Powers : Right . Okay, fine very good.
Supervisor Torlakson: And just to register again my concern. I
am concerned about changing that $6 . 00 amount and that is an
issue that we have to debate subsequent to the hearing process
that comes up. . .
Victor_ Westman: Well, now remember the host mitigation fee only
appears in the franchise agreement . Okay.
Supervisor Smith: Can I make a motion about something we might
agree on.
5
Supervisor Powers : Sure . Please do.
Supervisor Smith: In the transfer station franchise agreement on
page 23 , well 22 and 23 , the issue of self-haul rates . I
strongly believe we should use something similar to alternative
two which says that essentially the self-haul customers will be
charged no more than the market rate and what I would suggest is
that we modify the language to say notwithstanding 6 . 1 the gate
rate charge to customers delivering less than one ton of solid
waste per day shall not exceed the average of the charges of all
other landfills and or transfer stations providing the same
service in Contra Costa County with similar customers . So moved.
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Second.
Supervisor Powers : There' s a motion and a second to provide that
language in the self-haul section of the ACME Transfer franchise .
Any further discussion.
Supervisor Bishop: I do have some questions . Alternative two,
you say it' s similar to alternative two.
Supervisor Smith: Yeah, I just excluded Solano and Alameda
counties . And included transfer stations in addition to the
landfills so that essentially it' s saying it has to be the
average or in the market for self-haulers going to other
landfills or transfer stations in Contra Costa County.
Supervisor Bishop: Their gate rate?
Supervisor Smith: Um, humm. Self-haulers .
Supervisor Powers : Further questions . Hearing none, all in
favor of the motion, signify by saying aye . Those opposed.
Okay, passes unanimously. You had mentioned Jeff also host
community mitigation in relationship to the ACME situation.
Supervisor Smith: Okay, that' s on page 16 of the transfer
station franchise agreement and the way it' s written here, it' s
an amount to be paid out of the total surcharge and I would
suggest that it should be $2 . 00, so I' ll make that motion.
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Discussion. I'm a little concerned that
we' re going to get up past the $10 range by going taking these
thing incrementally. I mean is it the point and can we get to it
by doing what you' re suggesting, Jeff, but still get to a cap as
Supervisor Bishop has tried to do.
Supervisor Smith: Well, I have an over-all suggestion. I don' t
know if people will like it .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: We' re going to have to face it sooner or
later. Why don' t we get to the cap now and work backwards .
Supervisor Smith: The overall suggestion. Oh.Oh. Well, I think
if we go back to the origin of the fees, this will at least
clarify what I was thinking. I don' t know if the rest of the
Board will think it' s a good idea. But at Keller the state fee,
the Eastin fee, $1 . 34, should be charged separately as a dollar
per ton fee . At ACME, I would suggest that the LEA fee of $1 . 00
and the 939 fee of $ . 15 be charged separately as $1 . 15 per ton as
will need to be modified for future action and then I would
suggest that the Household Hazardous Waste fee and all other
programs which are currently paid for by different fees in
addition to the $2 . 00 that I just suggested for the host
mitigation be coupled into the franchise and that franchise
percentage be 25 percent for both proprietary fees at ACME and
Keller. That' ll end up making the total fees $12 . 24 if BFI
really reduces it to $39 . 00 . I'd also suggest that 5 percent of
that or $1 . 95 be reserved in a trust fund by the County to assure
6
}
that we have funding for potential costs of litigation and
closure . And that if that is not needed, we' ll be able to refund
it to the rate payers. So, I' ll make that motion.
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Since you took your calculator, what' s
the base rate excluding the closure cost, the trust fund.
Supervisor Smith: Well, if the base rate stays at $39 . 00 and
there' s no need for the trust fund, that brings it down into
$10 . 00 range total . That includes the State fees, the Eastin
fee.
Supervisor Bishop: 25 percent of $39 . 00 is roughly $10 . 00 .
Supervisor Smith: $9 . 75 .
Supervisor Bishop: Right and if $2 . 12 goes away. And then
you' re talking about, we' re still talking 2 , 2, and 2 . We' re
talking about 6 and then you' re saying that $4 . 00 of that, are
you suggesting that when. that is reduced by the $2 . 12 if that
goes away, that that 25 percent is reduced or are you just
suggesting that the County get more of that 25 percent . Which is
what basically what I suggested except my percentage amount was
less .
Supervisor Smith: Well, what I'm suggesting is that the $1 . 34
stay at Keller, the $1 . 15 stay at ACME which is a total of $2 .49
fixed dollar per ton fees, that the rest of all of the programs
be paid for out of a franchise which is set as a percentage
surcharge of both the proprietary rate at Keller and the
proprietary rate at ACME and that that be 25 percent which will
end up if they reduce their proprietary rate to $39 . 00, it will
end up being $9 . 75 . And that all the other programs, mitigations
be paid for out of that money. And then I made the comment and I
think it' s important that we reserve a quarter of that, 5 percent
essentially for potential costs of closure and litigation and
that we be able to refund that to the rate payers if it' s not
needed. So that turns out that isn' t a necessity, then it' ll end
up in the $10 . 00 range .
Supervisor Bishop: Is that a motion?
Supervisor Smith: Yeah.
Supervisor Bishop: Okay, at this point, I would not be
supporting that motion.
Supervisor Powers : Well, is there a second to the motion. We
might not go anywhere with it . I' ll second the motion for
purposes of discussion.
Supervisor Bishop: Okay, I will not be supporting the motion. I
think you know as a suggestion if I hear no interest in exploring
the suggestion, my feeling is the $1 . 15, other counties do not
charge an AB 939 and their LEA is much less . It' s absorbed in
what the County receives . I would prefer seeing the $1 . 15 going
down and being absorbed. I think what we would be doing by this
action is not enough. I think I'm not in agreement with Miss
Fanden. I think $4 . 00 is too little . I think there is a cost of
administration of these programs . I think there is a need for
mitigation but I believe I'm someplace between you two folks and
it looks like Nancy we' re not going to be good guys today as you
said. But I cannot support the motion. I think we are not going
down low enough. I think at this number we will continue to see
the Central County JPA and those jurisdictions go out of County.
Supervisor Powers : Okay, now one thing I didn' t hear was how we
handled the $2 . 00 and $2 . 00 on the ag and transportation and I
assume that' s I mean we have to consider where to spend that
money within this framework.
7
Supervisor Smith: What I was suggesting was that within the 9 . 75
that the Board will then have the responsibility of determining
that, those mitigation needs within that amount . Essentially,
well, right now it' s all of those numbers that I included
together are $13 almost $14 so it' s a bit of a cut .
Supervisor Powers : What' s almost $14 . Your motion was $12 . 24
right .
Supervisor Smith: Right . It ends up being $12 . 24 if they reduce
their proprietary rate to $39 . 00 . Currently it' s 5 . 25 plus 5 . 90
plus . . .
Supervisor Powers : Now, is there any minimum involved in that?
Supervisor Smith: Actually,we should have a minimum. I' ll leave
that for the Board' s discretion.
Supervisor DeSaulnier: What a coward.
Supervisor Smith: Hey I took the first shot .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, we got a motion on the floor. It' s got
a second. Is there any discussion on that .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: My only further discussion is I agree
with Supervisor Bishop. I don' t think it' s enough. We' re
getting closer but when you look at not being partners with BFI
but looking at who we' re competing with and I realize to a
certain degree, we' re comparing apples and oranges, Potrero Hills
their County fees are $9 .46 . I think we at least have to be fair
and get to that rate and for me I think they should be less than
that . And waste is $14 . 73 and if BFI can absorb more costs maybe
the charges will go even less . So, . . . 9 . 75 is we' re getting there
but it' s not close enough.
Supervisor Smith: Well, I would suggest that you know we reserve
the right to review these fees in the future. If it' s in the
right direction, maybe what we should do is implement this for a
month or two months and then reevaluate it and see if we have
gone low enough because it seems to me that we' re not going to be
able to cut absolutely to the quick unless we know what effect
this is going to have on the bottom line, the operation of County
programs .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Well, I think we have to make a
commitment today Jeff or we' re going to lose even more waste . I
mean we can' t just go on ad nauseam like this until those kids
are all in college .
Supervisor Smith: Okay.
Supervisor Torlakson: I think what we' re all trying to do is
find a way to get legitimate reasonable approach to doing our
share in terms of lowering the fees issue and some accommodation.
I think it' s going, to be difficult finding the right combination,
the right formula but we' re all headed in the same direction.
And I just want to put in context again, the amount of the fees
that our county discretion, around $11 . 00, which translates to
about $1 . 10 per household per month on your average bill of $22
or $24 per month so our the fees we' re debating here are
important but the big issue is the market competition out there
is forcing the rates down somewhere you know over $2 . 00 and
that' s going to be beneficial . We' re working on the edge that
will make some difference in a couple of percent one way or
another on the household garbage bill rate and it' s important to
try to fine tune that . I had, I can' t support this motion, maybe
I don' t understand it all together but I also think it may be a
little high in terms of what' s out there that needs to be
competed with and I know in several people' s discussions we said
8
the County you know didn' t get into this business originally to
set up a cash register for County programs but a lot of those
programs by the way are very important ones in the County and
they are related to solid waste . We have crews going around in
the conservation corps, welfare workers that are cleaning up the
roadside dumping, cleaning up a lot of the garbage and litter
problems that are part of our solid waste problem in Contra Costa
County. If we eliminate some of those fees, some of those
programs will disappear and that' s going to be the consequence
and we' ll have messier streets and creeks and so forth as a
consequence. We may find other ways innovatively to pitch
together. I had scratched out on mine the Household Hazardous
Waste . Let that go to cities or regional sanitation district
efforts or whatever or some other mechanism. So, that was $2 . 00 .
I'd taken the LEA and Resource Recovery and cut them both in
half . That was another dollar and the franchise fee and rate
review added up to $4 . 00 . So, I came up with $7 . 00 by that
mechanism in terms of some way to eliminate fees . I guess I'm
concerned in the current motion of the lack of specificity
regarding the 2 , 2 , and 2 or the various mitigation fees and I
understand that would be left for future discussion but I am you
know not comfortable at this point with that motion and that way
of doing it .
Supervisor Powers : Well, Tom, one of the problems is that the
LEA program dollar is the amount that is budgeted and likewise
the $2 . 12 is what is budgeted, so if you want to eliminate them,
be sure that you understand what' s going to happen is it' s got to
come out of the mitigation fees unless we find some money
elsewhere . And that' s the bottom line problem. It' s easy to
eliminate a specific fee but somewhere along the line we' re going
to have to put it back in if we' re going to provide the program.
So, Local Enforcement Agency program and Household Hazardous
Waste Program we all got to be funded.
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Excuse me, we won' t have to worry about
host mitigation if there' s no trash going there at all .
Supervisor Powers : That' s true.
Supervisor Torlakson: True the hazardous waste mitigation, well
in one sense maybe and in one sense not because there is special
waste that will continue to go there . The fact that the landfill
is there is you know it' s a state of being, it' s a state of
impact . Regardless if you could clear up every environmental
issue which is always going to be hard to do, you have the
reality no one wanted the landfill in their community because of
the image issue and the other impacts of just having it there.
and there will still be some waste going. The Household Hazardous
Waste just to explore Mr. Power' s comment further. As I
understand it again in the earlier discussions where the cities
had agreed and supported a proposal on the BFI landfill closure
to take that off of the landfill tipping fee and collect that at
a different place and I know Delta Diablo is exploring a regional
issue where we may collect through the sewer fees the monies to
do the household hazardous program and not have it be on the
tipping fee and again various counties have done it in different
ways . I'm just exploring that may be one way to get $2 . 00 off
the table from this discussion.
Supervisor Powers : Well, if you put it on the can, then they' re
paying the same amount anyway, so you know it' s just putting it
from one pocket to the other. You' re putting it on the
surcharge . You' re putting it, I mean it' s not like a net savings
to the public . If we want the program, we've got to pay for it
and if you want to pay for it on the sewer tax, you want to pay
for it on the garbage can, you want to pay for it at the transfer
station, it doesn' t matter but right now, there' s no other source
of money for that Household Hazardous waste program other than
what we budgeted in the tipping fee and nobody' s agreed, I mean
9
they talked about it but nobody' s laid anything in writing on my
desk that says that, so if we reduce it and we have an overall
fee, we have the choice of taking it out of Household Hazardous
Waste to meet host community mitigation or anything else. So, I
want you to understand that .
Supervisor Torlakson: Right . I do understand that . I have
discussed with Pittsburg the possibility of collecting it at
their transfer station. I mean there' s different places to
collect it . I guess the question is is this the appropriate
place to collect it or is there a more local place to collect it
whether it' s through the regional sewer district or whether it' s
through a transfer station.
Supervisor Bishop: Could we it would seem simple that we make
the amount contingent and say it will be this amount until such
time that the cities take over and then it will be reduced by
that amount with the understanding that all cities would work in
concert . As we've heard today, Antioch has already got that
moving in that direction. I think it will happen that maybe we
say rather than just saying 25 percent, maybe we put that $2 . 12
someplace else and then make a reduced percentage amount of the
rest and maybe you know if you want to work on a motion Mark,
have at it, okay. . .
Supervisor Smith: Well I wanted to try to still argue for my
proposal with respect to the Household Hazardous Waste Program.
I think the reason that I think it would be best to incorporate
it into the surcharge at this point is because of these
uncertainties . We've talked about possibly funding it through
the storm water assessment . We've talked about possibly funding
it through City franchises . I know that Central San and the mini
JPA have been interested in funding it possibly through
franchises there or at least funding part of it . There' s a lot
of debate about where it will actually end up. Seems to me that
if we include it as a requirement at this point to be paid out of
the franchise fee that subsequently when we finally find a way to
do the program with a different funding source, we have the
ability at that point to reduce the franchise or reduce the
surcharge and save that money but if we eliminate it now, we' re
essentially terminating the program.
Supervisor Powers : Did you want to make a motion? Or did you
just want to interrupt this discussion. Did anybody ask you a
question or did you. . .Okay, does somebody want to ask him' a
question or do you want to help us .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: I move to call for the question. You've
helped us enough.
Supervisor Powers : Okay, let' s go a little further in this
Household Hazardous Waste situation. There is a desire on the
part of many jurisdictions to handle it differently. Right now,
we have a County wide program that' s being operated by the County
in most areas . Clearly Central San would like to operate the
program in Central County from what I understand from their so if
we eliminate this funding source, someone will step into the
breach and provide the program that' s . . , yes .
Supervisor Smith: How bout we make it a one year commitment at
this point, so that we' re committing ourselves to find another
funding source for the program after the end of the year.
Supervisor Powers : Yeah, we do have a program going now, so if
we do eliminate that fee the program goes bye, bye . And you
recall the public reaction to that when it wasn' t funded or when
ACME didn' t pay the bill in central County. It wasn' t very
pleasant . The people like that program and they like it did you
have a thought, that' s an amendment to your motion.
10
Supervisor Smith: Not . I' ll leave my motion the way it was .
Supervisor Torlakson: Trying to understand on one more point . I
don' t know. I think the public likes the idea of the program but
it' s very, very low utilization as hard as we've tried. It' s a
fraction, it' s a very dismal number actually in terms of the
number of people actually utilize the program and so there are
efforts to reevaluate the effectiveness of the appointment system
process that I know Delta Diablo is in the midst of doing that .
So, whether we keep it in place until there' s a replacement, I
think that' s you know part of this discussion. If you take this
out of your numbers Jeff, , what does that leave the rate to be.
So, if there' s a replacement type fee put in place by some other
mechanism whether it' s a sanitation district . Whether it' s a
transfer station surcharge. Or some other mechanism for
collection at the household you know point of origin on the haul
contract .
Supervisor Smith: If we don' t need to use the trust fund for
closure and if we find another source for the Household Hazardous
Waste, then the fees become $8 . 17 using my formula.
Supervisor Bishop: I didn' t get that . Become $8 . 17 . You took
the $2 . 12 out .
Supervisor Powers : Okay take $2 . 12 out and $1 . 95 out and it
becomes . . .
Supervisor Smith: $8 . 17 . So using the formula that I suggested
if we find place for Household Hazardous Waste, if we don' t need
to use the closure trust fund, it' s $8 . 17 .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: So if, jump in here and make it more
obtuse . And if' it' s $8 . 17 and we did a timeframe where we could
give the options to the jurisdictions, we could do household
hazardous waste and charge it for the $2 . 12 for the 6 months and
in the meantime they could try to find a way to do it . Could we
make that as part of the. . 6 months . . so basically what we' re doing
is we' re giving the jurisdictions the option to either include
the be part of the $2 . 12 we do it for 6 months and they' re trying
to find other options .
Supervisor Smith: Yeah, we could say let' s do this for 6 months .
At 6 months, we' ll reevaluate and adjust the surcharge as needed
to address the Household Hazardous Waste and/or the closure
costs .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: So, it' s $8 . 17 with that added for 6
months and in the meantime, the jurisdictions are out' trying to
find other alternatives if they choose .
Supervisor Bishop: How did we get down from $12 . 24 to $8 . 17?
Supervisor Powers : $1 . 95 and $2 . 12 minus $12 .24 equals $8 . 17 .
Supervisor Bishop: Okay, what was the $1 .,95? Could you run that
by me again.
Supervisor Smith: that' s 5 percent for litigation and closure
cost trust fund. If we don' t need it, we refund it back to the
public . In reality, that' s to me if we get tagged for some
closure costs, and litigation fees, public obviously is going to
have to pay it . All we' re saying is let' s keep it apart for the
moment until the case is resolved. So, you' re saying Mark, let
me understand, you' re saying go ahead with the proposal that I
suggested, reevaluate in 6 months with the intention to drop out
the household hazardous waste and closure fees if we can based on
new information at that time .
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Closure fees aren' t going to be part of
11
it is that right?
Supervisor Torlakson: Eliminate those now?
Supervisor DeSaulnier: Right .
Supervisor Powers : Closure fees, eliminate them.
Supervisor Smith: The closure trust fund.
Supervisor DeSaulnier: So, we' re at 8 . 17 plus the household
hazardous waste for 6 months .
Supervisor Powers : You don' t want to include the litigation fund
is what we' re saying.
Supervisor Smith: It just means we' re going to have to pay it
out of the general fund someplace.
Supervisor Bishop: That 8 . 17, does that you' re not including the
$1 . 34 and you' re not including the LEA are you.
Supervisor Smith: No, what I'm saying, go back to what I said.
What I'm saying is $1 . 34 per ton at Keller. $1 . 15 per ton at
ACME to pay for 939 and LEA plus 25 percent of the base rate of
both, base proprietary rate, the proprietary rate of both ACME
and Keller, all of that combined is $12 . 24 , if their rate is
really $39 . 00 and then in 6 months we can eliminate $1 . 95 and
$2 . 12 if we can find alternate funding for those revenue streams
because otherwise if we eliminate the $2 . 12 now, we eliminate the
Household Hazardous Waste Program. If we don' t plan for
potential liability and lawyers fees, it' s just going to come out
of the general fund. And that' s specifically allowed for us to
pay those charges out of the surcharge by reason of the franchise
fee and if we don' t need it, we refund it to the public.
Supervisor Powers : Okay, that' s an amended motion. Is that
right .
Supervisor Smith: Yeah, I think that was basically it .
Supervisor Powers : Now, let me just ask the question. We are
not assuming that we are eliminating the $2 . 00 open space or
$2 . 00 transportation.
Supervisor Smith: Right .
Supervisor Powers : Or the $2 . 00 mitigation. So, if you look at
that it may all go to that .
Supervisor Smith: Right . It might all go to that .
Supervisor Torlakson: I can support it in that context . We' re
not making a decision, not having that debate today.
Supervisor Powers : Okay, is there any further discussion? all
in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye . Those opposed.
Passes 4-1 . (Supervisor Bishop voted no. ) And we have that .
Now let me see if there are a couple of other things that we
missed in the process .
Supervisor Smith: Oh, we didn' t make the motions about the Solid
Waste Authority. I move that we send a formal letter signed by
the Chair of the Board requesting membership on the Contra Costa
Solid Waste Authority in a membership status equal to the other
members .
Supervisor Powers : Now let me just raise one issue with regard
to that . Do we want to also indicate to them that we are looking
at undertaking the franchising of the unincorporated areas and
12
therefore they should not enter into agreements with the current
franchisers until such time as we all sit down at the table and
work that out . Because we had indicated that previously to but
we had not given formal notice of that .
Supervisor Bishop: Let me respond to that . I would prefer just
going with the resolution as it' s stated because there are
several unexplored issues on the takeover of franchising. We
have given notice to Central Sanitary District that we may
exercise our right to take over the franchising. I don' t think
we want to muck this up at this point . Let's just stick with
consider requesting membership and explore that as a separate .
Supervisor Powers : The only reason I suggest that is that
heretofore the JPA has not really been serious about considering
our membership and unless we have garbage to direct and to
franchise, we will not be a player in the program because we have
just given up rate regulation on the landfill and there is if we
do not exercise our authority that we adopted in an ordinance to
take over these franchises in the unincorporated areas, there' s
actually really no reason for them to invite us to the table .
Supervisor Smith: Well, I think we should say don' t franchise
our territory without us .
Supervisor Powers : Fine . Why don' t we do it that way then.
That will probably get the word across . Say that' s included in
the letter.
Supervisor Smith: That' s included in the letter.
Supervisor Powers : Is that okay with the seconder. Fine .
Supervisor Bishop: Before we vote can we hear from Miss Rainey.
Supervisor Powers : We sure can. Sue.
Sue Rainey: thank you. I know you've had along hearing. I will
be very brief . I did want to correct one thing that Tom
mentioned. Tom Torlakson on the Central San Franchise . Ours
runs just about a little between one and two percent because we
don' t make any money off it, just cover expenses only. So there
would be nothing for us to contribute back to the pot . Having
said that, first when we started the small JPA we did invite the
County. We had hoped that you would join us and we have worked
for the last three to four years on trying to be a cohesive unit
to do some good bargaining to get the best rates for our rate
payers . I think the cohesiveness of the group having all of
Central San' s area, all of Walnut Creek' s and all of the City of
San Ramon proves that the American process works . Competition
works . When we started as a JPA, we were looking at tipping fees
in the 70' s and the landfills could not live with that amount .
With the competitive process, we are looking at rates in the 40 ' s
wherever we go. We would hope and we are inviting the County to
be an equal member within our JPA hoping that it will continue to
work with us in a spirit of keeping that as a cohesive unit .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, with that we have a motion that' s on
the floor.
Supervisor bishop: Could we add to that motion, amended to
include number one with respect to the Crockett Valona. . .
Supervisor Powers : We already did that .
Victor Westman: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question. With your
action today though the notices which we gave some years ago that
all of these franchises in the unincorporated area would expire
in 95 or 96 remain in force and you' re not varying that .
13
y' 1
Supervisor Powers : Yes . Okay, then we' re asking them to be a
member and we' re asking them not to execute the franchises
without our participation and approval in the unincorporated
areas . All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye . Those
opposed. Passes unanimously.
Supervisor smith: We need to do one other thing which is we
didn' t actually approve the franchise agreements .
Victor Westman: Mr. Chair, that' s what I was going to speak to.
I assume you' re going to clarify your prior action was to approve
the franchise agreements with all the amendment and changes you
had asked for together with your discussion and approval of Mr.
Smith' s proposal as to the fees and the direction to staff to put
that in final form and have that executed.
Supervisor Powers : Very good.
Supervisor Smith: One other thing to add also in the sub
committee discussions and I've been operating under the
presumption there was a commitment from BFI that waste that went
through the transfer station would not be deposited at the ACME
landfill and I understood that that was something that everybody
agreed to and I don' t see it specifically stated in the transfer
station agreement, so I'd like to include that .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, is there any objection to that?
Victor Westman: I think there' s some, well, could I just
comment . There is some question under recent U.S . Supreme Court
cases about that but assuming that' s your preference and after
Mr. Bruen if he' s going to speak, we could put in a provision
that to the extent allowed by law or something and to the extent
it can be done, they will so do it .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, Tom.
Tom Bruen: . . . . If I could just add. . .basically specifies that with
few exceptions, the waste will be transported at BFI' s direction
to Keller Canyon. There are rare situations in which hard to
transport loads come in that would be directed away from the
transfer station to the east fill of ACME Landfill and that is
really I think to everyone' s benefit to extend the life of that
fill and avoid closure requirements . Large loads of concrete or
something like that that might show up at the gate of the
transfer station might in the future be directed to the fill .
Supervisor Powers : You know, here' s one thing that seems to and
it bothers me and maybe you can answer it Tom. You know, you are
just about to get a franchise for Keller Canyon and for ACME but
ACME still continues to accept waste at in substantial amounts at
the ACME Landfill avoiding. .
Tom Bruen: I don' t think that' s true, not since the .lease
agreement was executed between ACME and BFI .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, well at some point in time and I
haven' t had the numbers and it' s been a very hard one for me to
grab a handle on but I continue to hear and see trucks going to
ACME Landfill and that avoids paying fees that the County has
imposed upon Keller expecting certain amounts of waste there .
Tom Bruen: Well, I can tell you Mr. Powers that' s not my
understanding as of the date when the lease agreement was
executed which I believe was in March. And that basically
provides that all garbage coming into the facility is directed to
the transfer station except hard to transfer loads which are
very infrequent and that' s my understanding what the status quo
is .
14
Supervisor Smith: Well, can I just clarify, but in the sub-
committee meeting you said you'd be amenable to having this kind
of language .
Tom Bruen: But I thought I did discuss that exception that I'm
discussing with you now. At least that' s my recollection.
Supervisor Smith: Well, I guess my presumption is that for those
loads they wouldn' t go through the transfer station, they would
be delivered directly to the ACME Landfill and since we don' t
regulate the ACME Landfill, those fees would be charged would be
totally your proprietary fees .
Tom Bruen: Jeff as a lawyer, you' re being precise in your
phrasing and if you' re that precise then that' s fine . Certainly
waste that goes through the transfer station will not go to the
ACME Landfill .
Supervisor Powers : Well, I guess the question Tom, then is how
much waste is going to go to the ACME Landfill I mean on what' s
your estimate of that and would you agree to any limits in the
franchise agreements that would prevent it from going in excess
of some stated amount .
Tom Bruen: Well, I think we could certainly agree that any waste
processed through the transfer station would be would not go to
ACME but with respect to waste that might go to ACME, I think
there' s a chance that ACME might have a composting project on the
east parcel at some time in the future . Strictly speaking, green
waste is solid waste, so I think ACME would like the opportunity
if it does obtain a permit for a composting facility to have that
option and I think that' s addressed in the agreement between ACME
and BFI . I would expect it would be extremely infrequent that
other loads would be directed from the transfer station to the
landfill . I don' t think that . . .
Supervisor Powers : Could we put some general language like that
in either one or both of the franchises?
Tom Bruen: Well, I guess we' d like, the other thing I' d like to
mention is ACME' s receiving dirt to assist it in closure .
Because technically speaking waste dirt is . . .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, no dirt, no composting. How about so
municipal solid waste.
Tom Bruen: Well, MSW includes compostables and can include dirt .
But . .
Supervisor Powers : . . Subtract those two. Dirt is dirt and
compost is compost . I mean it' s pretty clear in your business at
least . What about other stuff .
Tom Bruen: I think the only other possibility that I'm aware of
would be hard to transfer loads that really weren' t capable of
being processed through the transfer station.
Supervisor Powers : Could we put that in the . . .could we put that
in the
Tom Bruen: You could yes .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, why don' t we do that .
Supervisor Smith: So, with those modifications and everything
that Vic said I' ll make that motion. That we approve the
franchises . Everything that Vic said.
Supervisor Powers : Okay.
15
T
Supervisor Torlakson: Let me also check for clarification. In
the franchises does it what does it speak in terms of any
commitment of wastestream? By any of our franchises like Bay
Point, Discovery Bay, it doesn' t speak to that? Okay.
Supervisor Smith: Doesn' t say anything about it .
Supervisor Powers : Okay, then we need to vote on the franchise
agreement with those modifications .
Supervisor Bishop: I don' t think we've had a second to the
motion.
Supervisor Torlakson: Second.
Supervisor Powers : Okay. Second.
Supervisor Bishop: Great because I wanted to comment or a
question. I did not vote on the rates, however, the policy
issues that are covered in the franchise agreement, I'm in
agreement generally on so I would a vote with this mean that I
implicit that I also agree with the rates . So, I don' t want to
vote on this okay. Great .
Supervisor Powers : All in favor of the motion, signify by saying
aye . Those opposed. (Supervisor Bishop voted no)
Supervisor Torlakson: Mr. Chairman, there were just a couple of
very small loose ends but one thing I just thought to make sure I
have it summarized correctly and I think I do. Sue Rainey
mentioned that their franchise fee was around 2 percent something
on that scale and I wanted to say that the action that was taken
today within six months or sooner if BFI wants to absorb some of
the costs that the five percent that our charges had previously
had in some rough impact on the garbage bill, on a household per
month basis would be cut in half basically by the motion that
Jeff put together and was passed and in the meantime, I think
it' s going to be a challenge for each of the communities to look
at this household hazardous waste . We' re not collecting that
money and putting it in the County General Fund. It' s not for a
County program to serve the County. It was being collected as
you said earlier, Mr. Chairman, for all the rate payers including
the cities for a County wide program including the cities and
there seems to be some interest in looking at that or
reformulating that in another way. The other issue was related
to our Bay Point and Discovery Bay Franchises and any others we
may have . I think we should get a report back from staff on the
other alternative disposal locations and costs and have them
direct them to meet with the Portrero/Garaventa, Richmond
Sanitary proponents since they have submitted the letter. We've
referred the letter to staff but we haven' t said when we' d like
it back. I'd like to sort of get a read out back fairly soon.
Both on that and the whatever Waste Management is doing in San
Ramon Valley. Are they making that offer available on a wider
basis so that we can have our staff report back on the details of
those other agreements because there are still seems to be some
very strong competition and healthy for the rate payer to
consider for our rate payers for alternative proposals .
Supervisor Powers : Could we do that in two weeks, Val, to have a
report on sounds like the three proposals maybe there are more
here to the Board. The Garaventa RSS, the BFI/ACME and the I
guess Altamont/Valley Waste proposals on tipping fees and maybe
at the same time if we've got can get an update if you don' t mind
on what' s happening with the JPA at that point .
Supervisor Torlakson: And finally, supervisor Powers, the memo
we have dated August 17th on the ACME Interim Transfer Station
that answers some of the questions . Not to go into it today but
maybe have it rescheduled. I think the public and Citizens
16
r
United have asked questions here and I'm not sure that they' re
really all that clearly answered in terms of what that interim
rate is still there somehow in the mix of things and that may be
being used to pay for the Household Hazardous Waste Program and
other programs . I to be agendaed back on since. . .
Supervisor Powers : So you want this memo back on. Say two weeks
from now. Okay. Fine very good. Okay, let' s try to get to some
of the timed hearings that we did have. . . . . . . .
17