Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03091993 - 2.4 2 -4 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS s Contra FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON "'" Costa DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT County r �7 DATE: MARCH 9, 1993 SUBJECT: APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND WORK PLAN BETWEEN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND THE CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Accept report from Community Development Director on Memorandum of Agreement with the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority and 1. Approve, and authorize Chair to execute, attached Memorandum of Agreement and Work Plan between Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority; 2 . Approve attached Resolution ratifying Memorandum of Agreement and Work Plan for a Solid Waste partnership between the County and the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority; and, 3 . Designate Supervisors McPeak and Bishop, as the 1993 County representatives to the AB 939 Local Task Force, as the County's representatives to the meet with the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority. FISCAL IMPACT As part of Task #1 in the Work Plan, the County and Authority will address staffing and funding. At this time, staff costs will be funded by current County share of the AB 939 Tipping Fee and by Resource Recovery Fee funds. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS On December 22, 1992 , the Board approved twelve conceptual points to serve as the basis for a formal agreement between the County and the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority for a partnership in solid waste management. At that time, Supervisors McPeak and Bishop were authorized to negotiate this agreement. The attached Memorandum of Agreement and Work Plan represent the successful completion of those negotiations. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE Ag::j ACTION OF BOARD ON 3 APPROVED AS PXCOXD&NDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISO ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Louise Aiello (510/646-1550) ATTESTED cc: Community Development Department (CDD) PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY , DEPUTY LA:gms 939v\bo\JPA-MoA Memorandum of Agreement and Work Plan between County and the Contra Costa SWA Continued -- Page Two . The Agreement and Work Plan call for cooperation on solid waste management issues on the part of the County, cities, and other franchising agencies. Additionally, the Agreement and Work Plan seek to build the trust necessary for a viable solid waste management organization representing all parties. LA:gms 939v\bo\JPA-MoA 2 -4 WORK PLAN TASK #1 - CONCEPTUAL POINTS #6 AND #9 A. (#6) Delineate, in cooperation with sub-regional solid waste joint powers authorities, roles and responsibilities for solid waste management. B. (#9) Discuss staff resources and financing. STEERING COMMITTEE: Don Blubaugh (Central); Dave Rowlands (East); Bill Davis (West); Val Alexeeff (County) with Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello STAFF: Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello PROCESS: Two workshops using staff preparatory work to focus on key policy/organizational/financing matters First workshop would be held in late June Final workshop would be held in September Workshops would include Authority Board Members, Board of Supervisors, members/staff from subregional jpa's, and other key staff/policy makers as appropriate. DELIVERABLE PRODUCT: Recommendations) for one or more organizational structure(s) and financing/staffing delineating roles, authority, responsibilities STAFF PREPARATORY WORK: 1 . What are the current requirements of State law? How does current law delineate roles, responsibilities, authority? 2. What are the defined purposes, goals, activities related to solid waste for the County, cities, subregional jpa's, Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority, Countywide AB 939 Task Force, Public Managers Solid Waste Committee, and AB 939 Project Managers? - 1 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg 3. Identify the areas of overlap and/or duplication including areas where overlap may be needed. Key areas to be addressed should include -- (a) CoIWMP Monitoring and Revision (b) SRREs and HHWEs update, revision, implementation (c) NDFEs and facilities development and operations 4. What are current funding sources and levels for the organizations and programs identified in #2 above? 5. What mechanisms are available for funding? WORKSHOP FOCUS: Review #1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Answer the following: 1 . Identify ways to streamline the different aspects of solid waste management to eliminate or reduce overlap/ duplication. In what ways could public agencies and private sector work to streamline, reduce costs, work together more effectively? 2. In what ways can independent/individual jurisdiction decisions making be provided for while building an interdependent and cooperative solid waste management organizational structure? 3. How can cost savings to member agencies or to rate payers result from restructuring how activities are handled and/or under what organization activities are handled? 4. What is the best structure to organize solid waste activities in an efficient, responsive manner in Contra Costa County? 5. Based upon #4, what staffing and funding levels are necessary? - 2 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg TASK #2 - CONCEPTUAL POINT #7 Develop a model waste collection franchise and a rate review model. STEERING COMMITTEE: Don Blubaugh (Central); Dave Rowlands (East); Bill Davis (West); Val Alexeeff (County) with Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello STAFF COMMITTEE: Key rate setting personnel from a cross-section of franchising agencies-- Walnut Creek, County, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Antioch, and Concord or Brentwood PROCESS: Staff Committee will prepare two reports for review with the Steering Committee; the reports will be submitted to the Authority and County by August 30 for consideration/recommendation to franchising agencies DELIVERABLE PRODUCT: Report which identifies key public agency considerations and provisions for solid waste franchises Report which identifies public agency considerations and key components in solid waste rate setting Reports should be consistent internally and with each other INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN REPORTS: 1 . Identify issues which the public sector needs to know/ address in framing a franchise 2. Identify issues which the public sector needs to know/ address in setting rates 3. Identify all component parts of costs and related reasons (justifications) for costs 4. Compare various approaches/models to consider in setting rates - 3 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg TASK #3 - CONCEPTUAL POINT #8 Develop, in cooperation with the subregional solid waste authorities, a method for evaluating the number and costs of transfer stations proposed and suggest criteria PROCESS: Prepare a preliminary report by May 15, 1993 STEERING COMMITTEE: Expand Steering Committee comprised of Don Blubaugh (Central); Dave Rowlands (East); Bill Davis (West); 'Val Alexeeff (County) with Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello, to include other key public agency representatives handling transfer station development DELIVERABLE PRODUCT: Preliminary Report which addresses the appropriate combination of local government and private sector responsibility/authority for transfer and material recovery facilities including recommendation for further action(s) by the County, Authority, subregional jpa's with regard to criteria for the numbers and costs of transfer/material recovery facilities INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN REPORT: 1 . Identify concerns of cities, county, jpa's 2. Consider AB 3001 3. Identify number of proposed facilities and related costs 4. Consider market place impacts on numbers/costs 5. Identify ways to encourage cooperation and/or reduce costs 6. Recommendation(s) for further action(s) such as use of consultant to evaluate numbers, locations, sizing, costs of facilities - 4 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TO ' WNTE FROM SUBJECT ffi-z W'. SIGNED PLEASE REPLY HERE TO DATE SIGNED i INSTRUCTIONS-FILL IN TOP PORTION,REMOVE DUPLICATE IYELLOWI AND FORWARD REMAINING PARTS WITH CARBONS. TO REPLY, FILL IN LOWER PORTION AND SNAP OUT CARBONS. RETAIN TRIPLICATE;PINKi AND RETURN ORIGINAL. FORM M103 CONMA COSTA COUNTY TO YJ 0 Z L) -If r '�j DATE- I. C, A FROM SUBJECT A SIGNED- PLEASE REPLY HERE TO DATE SIGNED INSTRUCTIONS-FILL IN TOP PORTION,REMOVE DUPLICATE NELLOW)AND FORWARD REMAINING PARTS WITH CARBONS. TO REPLY, FILL IN LOWER PORTION AND SNAP OUT CARBONS. RETAIN TRIPLICATE IPINKj AND RETURN ORIGINAL FORM M103 IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SUBJECT: A Resolution Ratifying a Memorandum of ) Agreement and Work Plan for a Solid Waste ) Partnership between the Contra Costa Solid ) Waste Authority and Contra Costa County ) RESOLUTION NO. 93/ 10>3 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES THAT: WHEREAS, a majority of the cities in Contra Costa County, along with a number of Special Districts which franchise for the collection and disposal of solid waste did jointly create the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority (hereinafter "Authority") and enter into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement; and WHEREAS, those cities and special districts desire to enter into a solid waste planning, coordinating and implementing partnership with Contra Costa County (hereinafter "County") for the betterment of cost effective countywide solid waste management; and WHEREAS, the Authority and County have formulated a partnership agreement and work plan which specifies the terms by which the two entities will jointly engage in solid waste planning, coordinating and implementing activities; and WHEREAS, it is desirable and appropriate to have that agreement and work plan ratified by all member agencies of the Authority, the Board of Supervisors and the subregional joint powers authorities; THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors hereby ratifies the attached Solid Waste Memorandum of Agreement and the Work Plan between the Authority and the County. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the following vote of the Board of Supervisors on the 9th day of March, 1993: AYES: Supervisors Smitl, ;ishop, McPeak, Torlakson NOES: iJone ABSENT: Supervisor Poirers ABSTAIN: i;one I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Contact: Louise Aiello (510/646-1550) cc: Community Development Department (CDD) Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of Supervisors affixed on this 9th day of P1a.rch 1993. Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By: Deputy Clerk 939vAbo\MoA-RES RESOLUTION NO. 931 103 2 -4 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERIM PARTNERSHIP IN THE PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS This Memorandum of Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into on 1993, by and between the CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY (hereinafter "Authority"), a public entity Joint Powers Authority and the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA (hereinafter "County"), a political subdivision of the State of California. It establishes an interim partnership for the planning, development and implementation of solid waste management policies and programs. RECITALS WHEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 ("Act") requires each city and each county in the State to divert solid waste from landfills and specifies diversion goals of 25% by January 1, 1995 and 50% by January 1, 2000 ..or face administrative penalties of up to $10,000 per day; and - 1 - WHEREAS, the planning, development and implementation of policies and programs aimed at achieving the State mandated diversion goals may have high short-term costs to local governments and to ratepayers; and WHEREAS, cooperative efforts by cities and counties in the planning, development and implementation of solid waste management policies and programs may assist in reducing costs for and increasing the efficiency of such solid waste management efforts and consequently accommodate the undertaking of more aggressive waste diversion programs; and WHEREAS, the Authority was formed on July 31 , 1991 , pursuant to the laws of the State of California by the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Clayton, EI Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon and Walnut Creek, the Towns of Danville and Moraga, and the Byron, Central Contra Costa, Crockett-Valona and Ironhouse Sanitary Districts for the purpose planning, coordinating and implementing solid waste activities county-wide; and WHEREAS, the County, as part of its General Plan, has committed to assuring the development of waste transfer, processing and disposal facilities which meet the highest established environmental standards and providing for cost effective solid waste management practices; and - 2 - WHEREAS, the Authority and County seek cooperative approaches to both solid waste management activities and the costs of such activities, resulting in wise and cost effective solid waste management, responsive to solid waste diversion goals and the welfare of the environment; and WHEREAS, representatives of the County and Authority have met and developed conceptual points of agreement for cooperative activities between the County and the Authority, attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County and the Board of Directors of the Authority have concurred by vote with the conceptual points; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the County intend this Agreement to be the framework for solid waste management planning and implementation between the County and the Authority; AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County and the Authority do hereby agree as follows: - 3 - SECTION 1 . COUNTYWIDE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 .1 The County and Authority agree that the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CoIWMP) will include provisions (a) for export of solid waste (b) for mechanisms within any solid waste export agreements to (1 ) monitor the location and costs of disposal, and (2) pass on to the ratepayers any cost savings resulting from lower export rates for disposal. 1 .2 County and Authority recognize and agree that if franchising agencies within Contra Costa County export solid waste, agencies outside of Contra Costa may be allowed to dispose of solid waste at Keller Canyon Landfill, and that as a result the County shall have no obligation to provide capacity for jurisdictions which have entered into such export agreements. Any importing entity shall pay landfill rates at least as high as those charged Contra Costa users, and abide by all the landfill requirements imposed upon Contra Costa users. County and Authority will comply with all applicable laws, including the Interstate Commerce Clause of the U.S. - 4 - Constitution, the Land Use Permit #2020-89, Conditions of Approval #5.2 and #9.3, and the daily tonnage limitations in the applicable Solid Waste Facilities Permit. 1.3 The County will respond to all comments on the CoIWMP from the cities and will include modifications in the CoIWMP on issues where a) concurrence between the County and cities has been reached; and b) the requested modification(s) will not jeopardize State approval of the CoIWMP. 1 .4 The County will complete the CoIWMP and seek final approval by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. SECTION 2 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANNING 2.1 Within six months from enactment of this Agreement by the County and by the Authority, the County and Authority, together with the subregional solid waste joint powers authorities, will (a) delineate their respective roles, functions and responsibilities for solid waste management, and - 5 - (b) develop a method for evaluating the number and cost of transfer stations and suggest criteria to assure the most cost effective and efficient system for agencies as well as for ratepayers. 2.2 Within six months from enactment of this Agreement by the County and by the Authority, the County and the Authority will develop a model solid waste collection franchise agreement and a rate review model. SECTION 3. COUNTY MATERIALS DIVERSION ORDINANCE 3.1 The Authority and its member agencies acknowledge the right of the County to enact the Materials Diversion Ordinance and the County will review comments from the cities regarding the Ordinance and use these comments to modify or amend the Ordinance with six months of enactment of this Agreement by the County and by the Authority. SECTION 4. STAFF RESOURCES AND FINANCING 4.1 During the six months following enactment of this Agreement by the County and by the Authority, the County and the Authority will discuss staff resources and financing. - 6 - SIGNATURES. THESE SIGNATURES ATTEST THE PARTIES' AGREEMENT HERETO. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, CALIFORNIA By: Ion ���I'�ll��< "� Date: Tom Torlakson, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors FORM APPROVED: VICTOR J. WESTMAN, County Counsel By: V Lillian Fujii, Deputy 010unty Counsel ATTEST: Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By: Deputy Clerk - 8 - 4.2 The County and the Authority agree that funding for the Authority shall continue to be based on population and paid by each member agency either directly or via a tipping fee which may be levied, pursuant to the Act, by the County or other appropriate entity at transfer station(s) or landfill(s). The levying of a tipping fee to fund the Authority shall require the request of a majority of the public franchising agencies using the transfer station or landfill and shall apply only to those agencies which are members of the Authority. SECTION 5. SUBREGIONAL SOLID WASTE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITIES 5.1 Nothing herein is intended to be in conflict with any agreement currently being negotiated by the County, any subregional joint powers authority, or any individual franchising agency. Furthermore, subregional joint powers authorities will be consulted on a regular basis during the course of negotiations between the Authority and the County. SECTION 6. TERM OF AGREEMENT 6.1 The County and Authority agree to work together on solid waste management issues for a period of three (3) years, renewable for five (5) years following review and affirmation at the end of six (6) months by the County, the Authority and its member agencies, and the subregional solid waste joint powers authorities. - 7 - CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY MEMBERS BY: Date: City of Antioch Date: City of Brentwood Date: Byron Sanitary District Date: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Date: City of Clayton Date: Crockett-Valona Sanitary District Date: Town of Danville Date: City of EI Cerrito Date: City of Hercules Date: Ironhouse Sanitary District - 9 - Date: _ City of Lafayette Date: _ City of Martinez Date: _ Town of Moraga Date: _ City of Orinda Date: _ City of Pinole Date: _ City of Pleasant Hill Date: _ City of Richmond Date: _ City of San Pablo Date: _ City of San Ramon Date: _ City of Walnut Creek ATTEST: - 10 - WEST CONTRA COSTA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY By: Date: Title ATTEST: - 11 - CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY By: Date: _ Title ATTEST: LA:gms 939v:MOU-JPA - 12 - 2 -4 WORK PLAN TASK #1 - CONCEPTUAL POINTS #6 AND #9 A. (#6) Delineate, in cooperation with sub-regional solid waste joint powers authorities, roles and responsibilities for solid waste management. B. (#9) Discuss staff resources and financing. STEERING COMMITTEE: Don Blubaugh (Central); Dave Rowlands (East); Bill Davis (West); Val Alexeeff (County) with Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello STAFF: Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello PROCESS: Two workshops using staff preparatory work to focus on key policy/organizational/financing matters First workshop would be held in late June Final workshop would be held in September Workshops would include Authority Board Members, Board of Supervisors, members/staff from subregional jpa's, and other key staff/policy makers as appropriate. DELIVERABLE PRODUCT: Recommendation(s) for one or more organizational structure(s) and financing/staffing delineating roles, authority, responsibilities STAFF PREPARATORY WORK: 1 . What are the current requirements of State law? How does current law delineate roles, responsibilities, authority? 2. What are the defined purposes, goals, activities related to solid waste for the County, cities, subregional jpa's, Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority, Countywide AB 939 Task a Force, Public Managers Solid Waste Committee, and AB 939 Project Managers? - 1 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg 3. Identify the areas of overlap and/or duplication including areas where overlap may be needed. Key areas to be addressed should include -- (a) CoIWMP Monitoring and Revision (b) SRREs and HHWEs update, revision, implementation (c) NDFEs and facilities development and operations 4. What are current funding sources and levels for the organizations and programs identified in #2 above? 5. What mechanisms are available for funding? WORKSHOP FOCUS: Review #1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Answer the following: 1 . Identify ways to streamline the different aspects of solid waste management to eliminate or reduce overlap/ duplication. In what ways could public agencies and private sector work to streamline, reduce costs, work together more effectively? 2. In what ways can independent/individual jurisdiction decisions making be provided for while building an interdependent and cooperative solid waste management organizational structure? 3. How can cost savings to member agencies or to rate payers result from restructuring how activities are handled and/or under what organization activities are handled? 4. What is the best structure to organize solid waste activities in an efficient, responsive manner in Contra Costa County? 5. Based upon #4, what staffing and funding levels are necessary? - 2 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg TASK #2 - CONCEPTUAL POINT #7 Develop a model waste collection franchise and a rate review model. STEERING COMMITTEE: Don Blubaugh (Central); Dave Rowlands (East); Bill Davis (West); Val Alexeeff (County) with Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello STAFF COMMITTEE: Key rate setting personnel from a cross-section of franchising agencies-- Walnut Creek, County, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Antioch, and Concord or Brentwood PROCESS: Staff Committee will prepare two reports for review with the Steering Committee; the reports will be submitted to the Authority and County by August 30 for consideration/recommendation to franchising agencies DELIVERABLE PRODUCT: Report which identifies key public agency considerations and provisions for solid waste franchises Report which identifies public agency considerations and key components in solid waste rate setting Reports should be consistent internally and with each other INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN REPORTS: 1 . Identify issues which the public sector needs to know/ address in framing a franchise 2. Identify issues which the public sector needs to know/ address in setting rates 3. Identify all component parts of costs and related reasons (justifications) for costs 4. Compare various approaches/models to consider in setting rates - 3 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg TASK #3 - CONCEPTUAL POINT #8 Develop, in cooperation with the subregional solid waste authorities, a method for evaluating the number and costs of transfer stations proposed and suggest criteria PROCESS: Prepare a preliminary report by May 15, 1993 STEERING COMMITTEE: Expand Steering Committee comprised of Don Blubaugh (Central); Dave Rowlands (East); Bill Davis (West); Val Alexeeff (County) with Avon Wilson and Louise Aiello, to include other key public agency representatives handling transfer station development DELIVERABLE PRODUCT: Preliminary Report which addresses the appropriate combination of local government and private sector responsibility/authority for transfer and material recovery facilities including recommendation for further action(s) by the County, Authority, subregional jpa's with regard to criteria for the numbers and costs of transfer/material recovery facilities INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN REPORT: 1 . Identify concerns of cities, county, jpa's 2. Consider AB 3001 3. Identify number of proposed facilities and related costs 4. Consider market place impacts on numbers/costs 5. Identify ways to encourage cooperation and/or reduce costs 6. Recommendation(s) for further action(s) such as use of consultant to evaluate numbers, locations, sizing, costs of facilities - 4 - 939w:DMOU-Wrk.Prg EXHIBIT A- .?. 3 To. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra n^�µ 1` 1RUNk INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE s ^^ SATE: November 30 1992 SUSACT. REPORT RESPONDING TO TIS RKQU ST D ' TIDE CONTRA COSTA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY THAT THE' OUNTY JOIN THE AUTHORITY =114C REOUElT(s)OR RECOMMENDATION(f)A"MOROUND AMD AWI/ICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: A. Create and refer this matter to a special committee consisting of the 1993 County representatives to the AB 939 Task Force, with the hope that there can be some continuity between the membership of the 1992 Internal Operations Committee and 1993 County representatives to the AB 939 Task Force. S. Provide conceptual concurrence to the following points and direct staff to work with representatives of the CCSWA in developing a contractual agreement based upon these points for presentation to the special committee created in "A" above: I. The County and the. Authority will commit to the development of an agreement for a period of .3 years but renewable for S years with the agreement to be reviewed at the end of the first 6 months for affirmation of its continuation for further consideration by the Board of Supervisors and the Authority. 2. This agreement will include a commitment on the part of the County to include export of solid waste as part of the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (COIWMP) . In return, the franchising agencies will assure that, if they export waste, export agreements will provide mechanisms to: (a) monitor the location and costs of disposal, and (b) pass on to the rate payers any cost savings resulting from lower export rates. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _TTS /IONATIAIE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINIi RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE �_AIMIOVE �� OMR IONAT SC DER SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK � ACTION OF BOARD ON AP►ROYED As RECOMMENDED L OTHER Avon Wilson, 4737. Imhoff Place, A. Martinez, representingthe Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority; Jim Sweeny, 296 Birchwood Drive, Moraga, a member of the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority; and Gretchen Mariotti, 100 Tennent Avern:e, Pinole of the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority; Barbara J. Woodburn, 621 Bracicaan Lane,.Martinez, member of the Martinez City Council, all appeared and spoke in favor of the County Participating in the Joint Powers Authority. EIDTE o>'su�ERVIso11s 1 HERElY CERTIFY THAT MIs M AMIE -X UNANMOUE WENT ; AMD CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION UM avEs: NOES AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE Bak" AMAIN: OF"kFIVIsORs ON THE DATE$NO" Contact PHIL socHELOR.CLARK Olt TW TNAPO OF cc: gee Page 4. surERvtsORs AND COLNTY AOMINISTRATpR . w ,ocruTY In addition, the final agreeanent will recognize that agencies outside of Contra Costa County may dispose of solid waste at landfills in Contra Costa County and that this may preclude the ability of or meed for the County to later provide capacity for jurisdictions which have entered Into export agreements. 3. The County will respond to all comments; on the CoIMP from the cities. A comment will be incorporated in the CoIMP where: a. the County and cities are able to reach concurrence on the comment, and b. inclusion of the comment will not jeopardize State approval of the COIMP. 4. The County will complete the Countywide Integrated Taste Management Plan (CoIMP) and secure approval by the California Integrated Waste Managements Board. 5. Closure of ACME Landfill is being addressed through the hands of a "Special Master" adjudicating the lawsuit between the parties. The member entities of the Authority will cooperate in this procesis with the County. 6. During the first 6 months of the agr*ement, the County, the Autnority and the subregional joint powers authoriVes will delineate their roles and responsibilities as solid waste entities. 7. During the first 6 months of the agreement, the County and the Authority will develop a model garbage collection franchise agreement and a rate review model. S. During the first 6 months of the agreement, the County, the Authority and the subregional joint powers authorities will develop a method for evaluating the number and cost of transfer stations proposed and suggest criteria to assure the most cost effective and efficient system for agencies as well as rate payers. 9. During the first 6 months of the agreement, the County and Authority will discuss staff resources and financing. 10. The cities acknowledge the right of the County to enact the Materials Diversion Ordinance on December 15, 1992 and the County will review comments from the cities regarding the Ordinance during the hearing and following Its adoption. Such comments will be used to modify or amend the Ordinance at the and of the six month review period. 11. The allocation of funding for ,the Authority based on population will be continued andl paid by each participating agency either directly or via a tipping fee. The County, or other appropriate entity, will agree to collection of a tipping fee at transfer stations) or landfill(s) sufficient to fund the activities of the County/Authority partnership upon the request of a majority of the entities using the transfer station or landfill. 12. Nothing herein is intended to be in conflict with any agroement currently being negotiated by Contra Costa Count; and any subregional joint powers authority. Turthermore, subregional joint powers authorities will be consulted on a regular basis during the course of negotiations between the Authority and the County. _2_ t 1 C. Remove this item as a referral to the 1992 Internal operations Committee. BACKGROUND: On April 13, 1992, the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority wrote to the Board of Supervisors asking that the County join the Authority. on June 15, 1992, our Committee not with representatives of the Authority. On July 29, 1992, the Board of Supervisors declined to join the Authority, but authorized our Committee, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, to meet with representatives from the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority in order to obtain additional information on the advantages and disadvantages of joining the Authority. In an effort to establish a context for cooperation on solid waste management, the County, cities, and other franchising agencies should seek to work together to build the trust necessary for a viable organization representing all parties. For this purpose, the Internal Operations Committee not with representatives of the Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority on November 30, 1992 and December S, 1992, and came to a conceptual agreement on a number of points, as is outlined in the above recommendations. As a part of this meeting our Committee received and reviewed the attached proposal from the Authority. Our Committee also received and reviewed in detail the attached report from Community Development Department staff dated November 25, 1992. Val Alexeeff, Director of the Growth Management and Economic Development Agency, noted in his presentation that the cities had a number of concerns about the language of Recommendation # 2 as It was originally proposed in the November 25, 1992 memo from Louise Aiello to our Committee. This recommendation was substantially reworked and reworded by our Committee in response to the concerns which were voiced by the cities. Supervisor McPeak, In particular, noted that while she had originally opposed any extended export agreement, she had changed her position, on the condition that the rate payer would benefit from the reduced tipping fees which might be paid by .franchising agencies in the short term by exporting solid waste out of County. However, she noted that in exchange for this concession, the franchising agencies had to recognize that the County might not be- able to guarantee any long-term disposal capacity at the Keller Canyon Landfill, since the County might have to allow the impottation of solid waste to Keller in order to maintain the economic viability of the Landfill. Supervisor McPeak also noted that none of the franchising agencies will be able to export until the County has an approved AB 939 Integrated Waste Management Plan and it was, therefore, in their own interest to insure that the plan was approved as quickly as possible if they were interested in exporting solid waste out of Contra Costa County. We also explored -the positions of various cities which had expressed strong feelings about export and the use of the Keller • Canyon Landfill, but were unable to get a clear statement of the position of these cities, particularly the City of Pittsburg and the City of Concord. Supervisor McPeak also noted her concern about the possible proliferation of expensive full-blown transfer stations which might not be necessary. She suggested that the total number of transfer stations needed to be contained, and that certainly the number of expensive (i.e. , $35 million) transfer stations needed to be restricted in preference to smaller, less expensive ones or a much smaller number of the larger, expensive transfer stations. This discussion lead to the proposed wording of recommendation # 9 above. -3- Following a very candid and forthright discussion of the issues and concerns on both sides, our Committee agreed to the above recommendations, to which we understand the representatives from the Authority with whom we met also have agreed. We are suggesting that a special committee of the Board of Supervisors be formed to continue this dialogue with the Authority. In order to provide some continuity, our Committee would strongly suggest that supervisor McPeak be continued as one of the Board's representatives on the AB 939 Task Force, and thereby one of the members of this special committee. cc: County Administrator Director, GMEDA Community Development Director Louise Aiello, CDD County Counsel Avon Wilson, Executive Director Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority Don Blubaugh, City Manager City of Walnut Creek Dave Rowlands, City Manager City of Antioch Sevin Carunchio, City of Pittsburg DATE: 3A? 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: � I RHONE: O(oG�J I//--7 _ ADDRESS: )N(, , CITY: k4,lt+i n .Z. I am speaking formyself OR organization:3h+r to b&41 Check one: NAME OF ORCANI7VTI0`) 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. SPEAKERS 1. Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse side) in the box next to the speakers' microphone before your item is to be considered. 2. You will be called to make your presentation. Please speak into the microphone. 3. Begin by .stating your name and address; whether you are speaking for yourself or as a representative of an organization. 4. Give the Clerk a copy of your presentation or support documentation, if available. 5. Please limit your presentation to three minutes. Avoid repeating comments made by previous - speakers. (The Chair may limit length of presentations so all persons may be heard.) DATE: REQUEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing e Board. NAME: PHONE: A DC arcny: I am speaking formyself OR organization: (NAME OF ORGANIZNTION) Check one: I wish. to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for Z against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. SPEAKERS I. Deposit the "Request to Speak" form (on the reverse side) inthe box next to the speakers'' microphone before your item is to be considered. 2. You will be called to make your presentation. Please speak into the microphone. 3. Begin by stating your name and address: whether you are ,speaking for yourself or as a representative of an organization. 4. Give the Clerk a copy of your presentation or support documentiition, if available. 5. Please limit your presentation to three minutes. Avoid repeating comments made by previous speakers. (The Chair may limit length of presentations so all persons may be heard.)