Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03121991 - 1.55 TOS BOARD .OF SUPERVISORS a�.b. .. /ontra r�. FROM: Sara Hoffman Solid Waste ManagerCouly DATE: March 12, 1991 SUBJECT: Waiver Request on $6. 00/Ton Recycling Surcharge , 'SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS (S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION REQUEST the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to waive the $6. 00/ton recycling surcharge on waste from Contra Costa County received at Altamont Landfill, or failing waiver, credit the surcharge against other mitigation fees. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The Waste Management Authority of Alameda County has advised: ,Contra .Costa., County that waste materials disposed of in Alameda' County will--°be,;sub3e'ct to .: a $6. 00/ton surcharge effective March 20, 1991. This surcharge is in conformance with the Alameda County Waste Reduction and Recycling Initiative Charter Amendment. Subsection 64 . 0150 of the charter amendment provides that if the collection of the surcharge is found to be in violation of an existing contract or agreement to import refuse generated outside of Alameda County for landfilling within Alameda County, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors may vote to waive collection of the surcharge. The agreements that govern the receipt of Contra Costa waste at Altamont Landfill are contained within Resolution Number . Z-6767, Conditions of Approval for the. Landfill Use Permit of Oakland Scavenger and the contract between Acme Landfill and Oakland Scavenger. The 'Zoning , Administrator's resolution provides for' two mitigation fees; a one-time $623, 150 payment for roadway impacts and a $3 . 09 per ton mitigation fee for other project related environmental impacts, CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:., X, YES , SIGNATURE T_ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION ` OF LARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION .OF BOARD .ON _ - 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER The Board Chair authorized to execute the request as referenced above. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A �UNANIMOIIS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY' OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE .ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Community Development Solid Waste Committee ATTESTED MAR 19 1941 Acme Landfill PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR hs/h16:surchgbos BY prem 4 f The contract between Oakland Scavenger and Acme Fill provides that the fee charged at Altamont can be modified by the results of "legislation or regulations issued, modified or made effective or on account of permit conditions or changes in disposal methods mandated by any governmental or regulatory body. . . . " No provisions are made for changes in fees due to initiatives, such as the Alameda County Waste Reduction and Recycling Initiative Charter Amendment. Consequently, imposition of the $6. 00/ton surcharge may be in violation of the contract between Acme Fill and Oakland Scavenger. The mitigation fees that Contra Costa County ratepayers currently pay to Alameda County are commiserate with its impacts on Alameda County. They were negotiated, in good faith, by representatives of our Solid Waste Committee and Alameda County Solid Waste Authority. No one anticipated this initiative or its possible impact oni that agreement. Consequently, if the waiver .request is not granted it may be appropriate for Alameda to credit the $6. 00/ton recycling surcharge toward the $3 . 09/ton payment for a net additional cost of $2.91 a ton. Furthermore, the issue of recycling is explicitly detailed in the conditions of approval of the use permit. Contra Costa County was required to meet specific recycling goals and to reports its progress to the Alameda Waste Authority. Our County met and exceeded those contract goals. The initiative would replace the agreed-upon performance related recycling goals with a recycling charge, after we have met our performance goals. It should be noted that the waiver and/or credit would be for the term of the current export agreement which expires on December 17, 1991. The initiative clearly requires that any new or extended contracts provide provisions for payment of the $6. 00/ton.