Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06271989 - 1.8 (2) 1-080 ro TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon Contra Director of Community Development �a DATE: June 21, 1989 Co 1I @ � SUBJECT: Contract Amendment for Review of Acme Landfill Costs ��+ SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION Authorize Chair to execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Touche-Ross to include an analysis of the historical profit levels of Acme Landfill. FINANCIAL IMPACT The current contract limit for the Transfer Station Rate Regulation Program, review of closure and post-closure costs, the identification of historical users of the landfill, and review of the landfill disposal fee is $159, 358. The requested additional cost for this amendment is $17,250. The revised total contract payment limit is to be increased to $176 , 608. The additional cost will be recovered from the Acme Fill Corporation. Acme' s cost for both these projects will be considered an eligible expense to be incorporated into the rates at the landfill and transfer station. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND On March 21, 1989 the Board of Supervisors approved a contract with Touche-Ross to establish a rate review program which requires approval of disposal rates by the County for fees charged at the Acme. Interim and Permanent Transfer Station. On Aprillil , 1989 the Board authorized an amendment to the agreement to include a closure and post-closure cost review for Acme Landfill. On June 6, 1989 the Board of Supervisors authorized an amendment to the agreement to include identification of historical users of Acme Landfill and a review of the major components of the $47 per ton disposal fee, to determine if the cost components are reasonable. Staff has negotiated an amendment to the agreement with Touche- Ross to conduct an analysis of the historical profit levels at Acme Landfill. The objective of the historical profit review is to evaluate the level of Acme Fill profits fo the last ten years by comparing Acme' s returns to other bus ' e i the solid waste industry. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT; _ YES SIGNATUR RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECO ME AT F B D COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE S : ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES. AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Community Development (Orig. Dept. ) ATTESTED JUN 2 7 1989 County Administrator --- - - — County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Solid Waste Commission SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Central County City and San. Distl.s (via CDD) Auditor-Controller M382/7-83 BY DEPUTY