Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-01-26 - AGENDA REPORTS - RESIDENTIAL REFUSE AGMT (2)F AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval Item to be presented y: Amelia Rietzel PUBLIC HEARING DATE: January 26, 1999 SUBJECT: RESIDENTIAL REFUSE AGREEMENTS: ANNUAL TERM EXTENSION DEPARTMENT: Planning & Building Services, Environmental Services Division RECOMMENDED ACTION Open public hearing, receive public input, and close public hearing and direct staff to amend the residential franchise agreements to reflect the agreements outlined in this report. Allow the residential refuse franchise agreements to automatically extend for a 12 month period. Each year the City Council is asked to make a determination of whether or not to extend the City's residential refuse agreements for an additional twelve (12) month term. The residential agreements have a six (6) year term which began on April 15, 1991. The agreements provide for an automatic twelve (12) month extension that is activated each April on the anniversary of the adoption of the agreements. This provision ensures that the agreements always have a remaining term of six (6) years. In April of 1999, the agreements will be extended to April 15, 2005. The agreement extension can be terminated by either party, providing that notice of the desired termination is provided at least 30 days prior to the April 15 activation date. City of Santa Clarita Resolution 96-43 requires that a public hearing be held annually prior to the activation of the automatic 12 -month term extension of the City's refuse agreements. The purpose is to provide residents with an opportunity to publicly express their level of satisfaction with service performance and any other issues related to the refuse franchisees. After taking public testimony, the City Council may choose to take action on one of the three options below. 1. Termination of 12 month extension and give notice to bid for new franchise. 2. Termination of 12 month extension only. 3. Extension of agreement for 12 month period. An analysis of the pros and cons of each of these actions is attached. AT r 41 11 1 The public hearing process in 1998 resulted in several improvements to residential refuse service in the City. Single and multifamily refuse rates were frozen for an additional twelve (12) months. Collection of recycling materials was increased from biweekly to weekly starting July 1, 1998. Payment for collection services can now be submitted on a monthly basis, and the haulers are required to post a complete list of services at the beginning of each year with billing statements. In addition, these services must be advertised quarterly. Pursuant to City Council direction to make every attempt to stabilize rates, the City and the haulers have agreed to extend the residential rate freeze for an additional 12 months, through December 31, 1999. Upon Council approval, refuse rates will have remained unchanged for a total of 3 years and 3 months. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS The City Council may choose to: ♦ Terminate the 12 month extension and give notice to bid for new franchise, or ♦ Terminate the 12 month extension only. FISCAL IMPACT None. ATTACHMENT Options: Annual Tenn Extension S:\PBS\ENVSRVCS\SOLWASTI\COUNCIL\1999\EXTENITE.DOC CITY OF SANTA CLARITA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ANNUAL TERM EXTENSION OF SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: A Public Hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita to consider the annual term and extension for the residential solid waste and recycling franchise agreements between the City of Santa Clarita and Atlas Refuse Removal Company, Blue Barrel Disposal company, and Santa Clarita Disposal Company. The existing residential franchise agreements provide for the term to be automatically extended by twelve months on April 15 of each year. The City Council has determined that residents will have an opportunity to express their level of satisfaction with the franchise service performance prior to the automatic term extension through the process of a public hearing. The hearing will be held by the City Council in the City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor, Santa Clarita, the 26th day of January, 1999, at or after 6:30 p.m. Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting David Peterson, Recycling Coordinator, Environmental Services Division, at (805) 284-1411, City of Santa Clarita, 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, California. If you wish to challenge this order in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing. Dated: December 29, 1998 Sharon L. Dawson, CMC City Clerk Publish Date: January 4, 1999 OPTIONS: ANNUAL TERM EXTENSION - 1999 OPTION I -TERMINATION OF TWELVE MONTH EXTENSION AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO BID FOR SERVICES A) PROS Termination of the annual extension of the franchise agreements and notice to initiate bidding for residential refuse services would allow for a new agreement and rate structure to be created through a competitive bid process. In addition, if the City chooses to grant a single exclusive franchise, rather than three franchisees, all local refuse operations could be managed through a single hauler, thus eliminating the need for additional coordination. Legal counsel has also indicated that following the C.A. Carbone vs. Clarkstown decision in 1994, annual term extension provisions in solid waste disposal agreements may be viewed as an instrument to interfere with competition for solid waste disposal services and raises the possibility of potential City liability. Terminating the extensions would negate this potential liability. B) CONS Termination of the annual extension at this time would only be applicable to residential franchises. The commercial agreements are not subject to franchise extension provisions until the year 2000. The existing franchisees are longtime local businesses that served the Santa Clarita Valley prior to City incorporation. This option would send a strong signal of dissatisfaction with the existing franchisees' levels of service and current rate structure. This would likely be interpreted by the existing franchisees as an indicator of eminent contract termination. Termination of these agreements would have an adverse financial impact on the three existing franchisees. During the period before termination the franchisees may choose to defer capital investments that are necessary to continue high quality service and to assist in new programs and future waste management plans of the City. An exclusive, or semi - exclusive franchise could not commence service until 2005. And finally, there is no guarantee that termination of the existing agreements would significantly improve service or lower rates. To exercise this option staff must be directed to draft a letter notifying the franchisees of the City's intent to terminate the extension. The letter must be delivered to the franchisees on or before March 15, 1999. A separate letter would also be required notifying the existing franchisees of the City's intent to commence a competitive bidding process immediately prior to the termination date of the agreements in April 2005. OPTION II -TERMINATION OF TWELVE MONTH EXTENSION The overall advantages and disadvantages of this option are similar to Option I. The key difference with this Option is that a notice of intent to initiate a competitive bidding process would not be issued. Because this option does not necessarily provide the existing franchisees with an indication of eminent contract termination, it is likely to provide a greater incentive to work with the City to implement additional waste and cost reduction programs before the agreements expire in April 2005. To exercise this option staff must be directed to draft a letter notifying the franchisees of the City's intent to terminate the extension. The letter must be delivered to the franchisees on or before March 15, 1999. OPTION III - EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT FOR 12 MONTH PERIOD A) PROS Extension of the franchise agreements for an additional twelve months will continue the existing long-term service (six years plus automatic annual renewal) arrangement that has existed since April 1991. The extension provides the franchisees with confidence that the City will utilize their services for an extended period of time. This allows the franchisees to make necessary capital investments to maintain a high level of service. Maintaining the automatic extension of the franchises motivates the franchisees to maintain a positive working relationship with the City and residents. In the past twelve months the franchisees have worked well with the City and residents. With few exceptions, the franchisees have also presented timely payment of franchise fees and reporting of disposal/diversion data. The franchisees have been responsive to calls from City staff and resolving customer complaints. In addition to providing the services and functions required by the agreement, the franchisees have also accomplished several other items during 1998 that are noteworthy. These include: ♦ Achieved the 50 percent waste diversion in 1997. This meets the California Integrated Waste Management Board's diversion requirement 3 years early. Santa Clarita is one of only approximately 40 cities in California to accomplish this. ♦ Agreed to stabilize Residential Refuse Rates until 2000. ♦ Implemented weekly recycling at no charge to residents on July 1, 1998. This has resulted in increased recycling throughout the community. ♦ Sponsored and Participated in various Community Events including Pollution Prevention Week, Arbor Day and Earth Day. Implemented programs in response to citizen input during 1998 public hearing process. Includes: ➢ Residents are notified that they can pay their garbage bills on a monthly basis even when billed every three months. ➢ Franchisees will include a complete overview of services at the beginning of each year and advertise these services quarterly. B) CONS Extends the franchise an additional year. Does not allow the City to obtain benefits putting the franchise out to bid and possibly acquiring a new refuse service arrangement. No City Council action is required for this option. S:\PBS\ENVSRVCS\SOLWASTI\COUNCIL\1999\GREENPRO.DOC