HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11061990 - H.1 H. 1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
DATE: November 6, 1990
MATTER OF RECORD
SUBJECT: Franchise Agreements for Keller Canyon and Marsh Canyon
Sanitary Landfills
This is the time for hearing on the proposed franchise agreements
for Keller Canyon (LUP 2020-89) and Marsh Canyon Sanitary (LUP
2010-90) Landfills
The County Administrator advised that he had had a request from
BFI for consideration of its franchise agreement, and as it has always
been staff ' s recommendation that there be two landfills sites because
of concern for problems that might arise in the approval stage or in
in litigation, and because of the critical need for another landfill
site and because the current export agreements will expire, the two
franchise agreements have been brought forward at the same time.
County Counsel reported that the Board approved Land Use Permits
for the two proposed landfill sites in the county which provide that
before any operations may be actually commenced or undertaken, it is
necessary that they enter a franchise agreement or contract with the
County to allow such operations, and that both operators have asked
that the County give some expedited attention to developing those
agreements which are before the Board today.
He noted that the Board also has an ordinance which provides
that the operators may not commence operations until they have secured
such an agreement with the Board.
. He noted that the agreements before the Board, which are
recommended by staff, provide, among other things, for full compliance
with all laws, city and county and state regulations; a specific rate
regulation procedure; for the fixing and collection of all required
and necessary mitigation fees and related costs; for closure and post
closure maintenance requirements; retention of discretion to determine
sub-areas to receive waste from; for the collection of all on-site and
off-site permit costs; revenues and fees fixed or involved with the
processing and operating these sites; and for penalty provisions for
violations of the agreements.
Sara Hoffman commented that the agreements were very compre-
hensive and would satisfy the Board' s requirements.
Supervisor Torlakson commented that he had not had adequate time
to review the documents before him. and wanted time for a more thorough
public process.
Supervisor McPeak inquired if the County Administrator had, in
response to her specific request, acquired a notarized statement from
BFI and Waste Management authorizing someone to speak on their behalf
and/or sign the agreement.
The County Administrator advised that had received a statement
signed by a representative of Waste Management indicating that Mr.
Sandy Skaggs is to represent and speak for them, and that he had
received a statement indicating that Scott Gordon and Tom Bruen,
attorneys, represent BFI, although neither statement is notarized.
Supervisor McPeak expressed concern that the County be dealing
with the principals who are authorized to commit the companies to the
terms of the agreements.
The Chair declared the hearing open and the following appeared:
Ro Aguilar, 11500 Skyline Boulevard, Oakland, representing East
Bay Regional Park District, expressed concerns about the proposed
franchise agreement for Marsh Canyon, objected to the fact that he had
just received a copy to review, and requested that the matter be
continued until all interested parties have a chance to review it.
Brian Kruse, 18201 Marsh Creek, Brentwood, representing the
Marsh Creek Association, requested more time for public input and
public comment.
David Tam, 1327 M. L. King, #5, Berkeley, representing the Sierra
Club, requested deferment of the matter to allow more time for review
and comment.
Steven P. Malloy, 1709 Putnam, Antioch, spoke of alternatives to
landfill and stated he supports the denial of a franchise.
Corrine Vieville, 5675 Marsh Creek Road, Clayton, voiced concerns
about the franchise agreement which she had not yet read, noted that
her property is one of the four that have been listed to be bought by
Waste Management, and that she understood they should be well on their
way to to reaching agreement on offers to acquire this property, and
to date she had received no bona fide offer on her property and
nothing is proceeding.
Wilbert E. Cossel, 16711 Marsh Creek Road, # 134, Clayton,
representing the Clayton Regency Residents, urged more time for public
review and public comment.
Jim Hicks, 2229 Oak Hills Drive, Pittsburg, representing Citizens
United, urged ample time for public comments on the figures that go
into the rates, and urged the Board to keep the public involved in the
process.
County Counsel clarified that the agreement requires that there
will be public hearings and opportunity for input on the rates.
Ted Nelson, 25 Emerson Avenue, Crockett, inquired if the cities
in the County are included in the agreement.
County Counsel advised that the agreement before the Board today
will have no effect on what the cities may or may not do on
franchising within cities.
There being no further speakers, the Chair inquired if was the
Board' s desire to close the hearing or keep it open. Supervisor
Powers moved to close the hearing, It was seconded by Supervisor
Schroder.
Supervisor McPeak declared that she was not prepared to vote on
closing the public hearing.
Supervisor Schroder expressed concern that the County continue to
move ahead because of its export agreements with other counties.
Chair Fanden suggested carrying the item through the lunch hour,
noting that there are mixed emotions on the matter, and suggesting
that the Board continue its discussion at 2: 00 o'clock.
Supervisor Torlakson advised that he did not support this
process, that he did not want to rush the process now, that the Board,
the cities, and affected agencies had not had an opportunity to review
the document, and that he would urge consideration of just postponing
the matter and dealing with it in a normal process at a later time.
Chair Fanden called for a vote on the motion to close the
hearing. Supervisors Powers, and Schroder voted aye. Supervisors
McPeak, Torlakson and Fanden voted no. Chair Fanden announced that if
anyone else wishes to comment at 2: 00 o'clock, they are welcome.
The Board recessed until 2: 00 p.m. this day.
The Board reconvened at 2 : 00 p.m. and continued its discussion.
The Chair noted that additional speaker cards had been submitted.
Jim Hicks, 2229 Oak Hills Drive, Pittsburg, advised that he had
reviewed the proposed agreement during the lunch break and listed a
number of items he wished to question.
Ted Nelson, 25 Emerson Avenue, Crockett, commented on a publicly
operated landfill operation as contrasted to privately owned and
operated, but noted that possibility is lost at this time and urged
the Board to move forward.
June Baker, 2946 Pierce Street, San Francisco 94123 , Special
Counsel for the City of Pittsburg, requested on behalf of the City
that this matter be continued so that the city can review the document
in further detail and make comments before the Board takes action.
David Tam, 1327 M. L. King # 5, Berkeley, representing the Sierra
Club, advised tat the Sierra Club concurs with the request of the City
of Pittsburg for a continuance of this matter.
There being no further speakers, the Chair inquired if the Board
desired to close the hearing.
Supervisor Schroder moved to close the hearing. Supervisor
Powers seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Board members and staff responded to the various questions that
had been raised during the testimony this day.
Supervisor Torlakson reminded the Board that at the time of
approval of the land use permit, he had submitted suggestions for
specific landfill mitigations to be attached to the franchise
agreements, and he again requested they be made a part of the
franchise agreements. This request was not adopted.
Upon motion by Supervisor Powers, seconded by Supervisor
Schroder, the Board accepted the staff report and approved the
Franchise Agreements for Keller Canyon (LUP 20209) and Marsh Canyon
Sanitary (LUP 2010-90) Landfills as set forth in the Board' s order
dated this day.
T -BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM; Victor J. Westman, County Counsel Cltrd
Cwa
DATE: November 6, 1990 C, "7
o
SUBJECT: Franchise Agreements for Keller Canyon (LUP 2020-89 )
V'
and Marsh Canyon Sanitary (LUP 2010-90) Landfills
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACPnROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . Accept this report and approve the Landfill Agreement(s)
presented by staff for both the Keller Canyon and Marsh Canyon Sanitary
Landfills .
2 . Authorize the Board Chair on or before December 5, 1990, to
execute the Landfill Agreement(s) on behalf of the County with the
applicants and owners for each landfill if presented with such
agreement(s) for a particular site executed in a form approved by the
County Counsel. The County Counsel's form, approval shall be indicated
on the agreement's signature page(s) prior to any Board Chair execution
thereof.
3 . If this agreement is not returned on or before December 5, 1990
for any one of the two sites in an executed form satisfactory to and
approved by County Counsel and prior to that date signed by the Board
Chair (or as appropriate, vice-chair) , this order's approval and
authorization shall expire and be of no further force and effect as to
the particular landfill site for which a properly executed agreement was
returned not in a timely manner.
4 . Certify that the Board's prior findings regarding the two
landfills are incorporated by reference, and certify that the EIRs for
the projects were completed in compliance with CEQA, that the EIRs were
submitted to the Board, and that the Board considered the EIRs prior to
approving the agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Supervisors has approved land use permits for the
Keller Canyon Landfill (LUP 2020-89 ) and the Marsh Creek Sanitary
Landfill (LUP 2010-90) . Section 13 ( "Franchise Agreement" ) of both land
use permits requires that before the landfill sites may be established
and placed in operation a franchise agreement or similar contract must
X
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE' .;"; 'o '
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF B ARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): G
ACTION OF BOARD ON November 6, 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES- I , III, IV, II NOES: V AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT; ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Jrg.Dept: County Counsel
ATTESTED November 6, 1990
cc: County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
Community Development Department SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Health Services Department
M382/7-83 BY ,DEPUTY
be obtained from the County. In addition, Contra Costa County Ordinance
No. 88-81 provides that such solid waste disposal facilities may not be
established and become operative until such an agreement is entered with
the Board of Supervisors . The agreement is necessary to provide
further implementation provisions (funding for mitigation, provision for
closure and post-closure cost, County rate review, establishment of
limited sub-county service area(s) and for related fees, etc. ) for each
proposed landfill site.
In several letters to the County Administrator over the last two
months the attorneys for the Keller Canyon Landfill have asked that the
County expedite the preparation of a proposed franchise agreement or
contract for their consideration and approval. Also, the applicant for
the Marsh Creek Sanitary Landfill has indicated interest in an agreement
with the County for that landfill site. Because of these requests and
interest County staff (the Administrator and County Counsel's offices)
have prepared an agreement to provide for the implementation of said
Section 13 of the two land use permits . This agreement is before you
today and on file with your Clerk.
Staff recommends that you approve the submitted agreement(s) and
authorize its execution by the Board Chair after it has been
appropriately signed by one or both of the sanitary landfill site
applicants in a form approved by County Counsel . Staff further
recommends that the Board provide that should one or both of the
sanitary landfill site applicants not return this agreement(s) in an
executed form on or before December 5, 1990 that is satisfactory to
County Counsel, that the authorization provided in this order for any
agreement(s) not timely returned will be withdrawn after December 5,
1990 . If one/or both of the agreements for each site are properly .
executed and returned they shall be effective as of October 31, 1990 .
The Agreement before the Board provides, among other things, for:
a. A specific procedure for rate regulation at the involved
landfill site(s) but reserves to the County at its discretion the
ability to establish a different rate review and fixing procedure if the
Board determines that is required.
b. Fixing and collections of required and necessary mitigation
fees and other related costs .
c. The exercise of County discretion to assist and determine
within the range allowed by State law the provisions to be made for each
site for closure and post-closure cost assurances (e.g. , trust deposits,
agreements, etc. )
d. Appropriate County discretion for the establishment and
limitation of sub-county service areas for involved landfill.
e.. For collection and payment to County for other required off-
site and related land use permit fees including County costs for
administration of the landfill site's entitlements .
This franchise agreement is a continuation of the approvals for the
Marsh Canyon Sanitary Landfill project and the Keller Canyon Landfill.
The County already has approved general plan amendments and land use
permits for these landfills . The final EIRs for the two overall
projects have been certified in connection with approval of the land use
permit, and this franchise agreement is part of the overall projects
covered by the EIRs. This agreement does not change the projects, or
any of the conditions of approval or EIR mitigation measures . This
agreement does not result in new significant effects or cause
significant effects previously examined to be more severe. None of the
circumstances requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR,
or an EIR addendum, are present.
Accordingly, in approving this Project, the Board should certify
that the Board's findings in approving the respective land use permits
for the Marsh Canyon Sanitary Landfill and the Keller Canyon Landfill
are adopted and incorporated by reference. The Board should also
certify that the EIRs have already been submitted to the Board, the EIRs
were completed in compliance with CEQA, and the Board considered the
EIRs prior to approving the agreement.
df4:vjw\memo\ke11er.agr