Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10031989 - IO.2 I.O.-2 A TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: -- Costa INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE -¢ . �o DATE: September 25, 1989 ra_,. .�P�` County sTa caur+ SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS FOR MITIGATING IMPACTS OF WASTE DIVERSION SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Request the Community Development Director to circulate the attached proposed Implementation Process for Mitigating the Impacts of Waste Diversion to the cities of Richmond, Martinez, Antioch and the Solid Waste Committee, requesting that they either submit written comments to the Community Development Department by October 18, 1989 or meet with our Committee on October 23, 1989 at 1: 30 P.M. and share their comments with us at that time. It should be emphasized to the cities and Commission that the process as outlined at this time is intended to apply only to existing landfills. 2. Request the Community Development Director to report to our Committee on October 23, 1989 at 1:30 P.M. on any written comments which have been received from the cities or Solid Waste Commission so that our Committee can further consider appropriate revisions to this process before recommending it to the Board of Supervisors for approval. BACKGROUND: On August 1, 1989 the Board of Supervisors requested some changes in the previous draft process for mitigating the impacts of waste diversion and asked County Counsel to report those revisions back to our Committee on September 25 , 1989. On September 25, 1989 we reviewed a revised draft of the process and made a few additional changes in it. The attached draft of CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENTXes YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINIST COMMENDATION OF BOA COMMIT E APPROVE OT SIGNATURE(S): wers Sunne Wright McPeak ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS{ABSENT --� , } AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: See Page 2 ATTESTED � ,� PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382 (1018$) BY '! ,a� ,DEPUTY v q the proposed process reflects what our Committee believes should be adopted by the Board of Supervisors. However, at our meeting on September 25, 1989, Everett Jenkins from the City of Richmond expressed some concerns regarding what organization would be making the final decision regarding whether any particular mitigation was adequate. We indicated that the permitting agency would make that decision, if there were not agreement among the parties. In the case of the Richmond Sanitary Landfill, the City of Richmond would make the decision with regard to that portion of the site which is within the City. Mr. Jenkins also raised the possibility of asking an outside arbitrator to make the decision. On September 25, 1989 we were also joined by Mark Braley, Executive Director of the West County Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority. We are asking that the attached proposed process be circulated to those cities most likely to be impacted by waste diversion from the existing landfills and asked to comment on the process. We are also asking the Solid Waste Commission to comment on the process. We want to emphasize that this review should focus only on how the process would apply to the existing landfills in the County. We will make further recommendations to the Board of Supervisors at a later date in regard to how the process should be applied to a new landfill site. We will be considering all comments on this process at a meeting on October 23 , 1989, following which we hope to return a final recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. cc: County Administrator County Counsel Community Development Director Mayor, City of Richmond Mayor, City of Martinez Mayor, City of Antioch Chair, Solid Waste Commission City Managers, Cities of Richmond, Martinez, Antioch Executive Director, West County Solid Waste JPA k COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE Contra Costa County CONTRA COSTA COUNTY R EC W i V E D MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA S FP 2 a 1989 Date: September 26, 1989 Office of COUnt y Administrator To: C. L. Van Marter, Asst. Co.Admin. Sara Hoffman, Solid Waste Manager David Okita, Assistant Dir. , Community Development From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel By: . Lillian T. Fujii, Deputy Coun Counsel Re: Process for Determining Compensation to Impacted Communities, as Mitigation for Waste Diversion Attached is the subject document, modified in accordance with the Internal Operations Committee's instructions at its 9-25-89 meeting. LTF:df attachments At- PROCESS FOR DETERMINING COMPENSATION TO IMPACTED COMMUNITIES, TO BE PAID BY BENEFITTING COMMUNITIES, AS MITIGATION FOR WASTE DIVERSION. INTRODUCTION. The 1989 County Solid Waste Management Plan, adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and ratified by the cities in accordance with Government Code section 66780. 1, recognizes that diversion of the wastestream, i.e. , the disposal of waste at a site other than its usual or historical place of disposal, may cause significant adverse impacts upon the community surrounding the alternate receiving disposal site, and that compensation (mitigation) for the impacts is proper. However, the Plan also recognizes that the compensation should be fair to both parties, and be founded upon real impacts . It is not intended to be a revenue measure for the host community. As a result, the following policy is included in said plan: "Compensation for Impacts of Waste Diversion. Communities benefitting from waste diversions will fairly compensate impacted communities for adverse impacts (i.e. , loss of capacity, increased traffic, etc. ) caused by the waste diversion. " This document sets forth a suggested procedural guideline for determining the proper compensation to impacted communities . I . FORMAL NOTICE BY HOST COMMUNITY Whenever a community (host city or group of cities) believes that there is a possibility or likelihood that there will be a significant diversion of waste that will negatively impact the host community, the host community should provide formal written notice to the agency with permit authority over the landfill operator, requesting the permitting agency to commence negotiations with the host community, the hauler, and other potentially involved parties as to the appropriate mitigation for any negative impacts of the diversion upon the host community. Comment: The host or impacted community will be most attuned to the possibility and extent of impacts from the diversion. Therefore, the host community should initiate formal discussion. If requested, County staff will be available to provide technical assistance to communities . II . DISCUSSION The permitting agency, the host community, the hauler and other parties shall immediately commence discussions on appropriate mitigation measures . Negotiations shall be concluded within 90 days of the date the host community provided formal notice to the permitting agency requesting the commencement of negotiations . The 90-day negotiation period may be extended once for a period of 30 days, upon agreement of all involved parties . III . DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE MITIGATION Whether and to what extent the host community will be negatively impacted, including appropriate mitigation measures, will be decided in accordance with the environmental review process of the California Environmental Quality Act. The parties may agree to mitigation measures in addition to those required by any environmental review document. However, all mitigation should bear a direct and reasonable relationship to impacts suffered by the host community as a result of the diversion; it is not to be a revenue measure. The cost of any mitigation measure should be separately identified on the customers' garbage bill so that customers will be informed on the reason for the additional charge. IV. SOLID WASTE COMMISSION Immediately after conclusion of the 90-day negotiaton period (or 120-day negotiation period if there has been an extension) , the issue of appropriate mitigation shall be submitted to the Solid Waste Commission for comment. In appropriate cases, the Solid Waste Commission may be requested to mediate disputes . Comment: The Solid Waste Commission is appointed by the Board of Supervisors to advise the Board and the cities and other public agencies on solid waste issues . It is therefore appropriate for the permitting agency to seek the Commission' s input. It may also be appropriate for the Commission to attempt to mediate disputes . V. FINAL DECISION Unless parties agree otherwise, the final decision as to the appropriate mitigation to a host community for a waste diversion shall be made by the permitting agency.