HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.3 Solid Waste Rate Review Study CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
MEETING DATE: March 28, 1983
SUBJECT Solid Waste Rate Review Coordination Committee Study
EXHIBITS ATTACHED Memorandum from Alameda County Solid Waste Management
Authority dated March 16 , 1983
RECOMMENDATION Designate special study session to respond to survey
t
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at this time
DESCRIPTION The Alameda County Solid Waste Management Authority
has requested that each of its members respond to the
Rate Review Coordination Committee survey which is
directed to the City Councils and governing boards of
each member.
I have attached a copy of the survey and some
background material for your information. It is
recommended that the City Council hold a study
session to discuss the issues addressed in the
survey. The Council may wish to consider such a
session immediately prior to its next meeting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. 7
ALAMEDA CC .JNTY SOLID WASTE L _JAGEMENT AUTHORITY
399 Elmhurst Street, Hayward, California 94544 (415) 88 1-6401
REC; LIVED
MAR 2 4 11983
CITY OF DUBLIN
DATE: March 16, 1983
TO: Mayors olf -Alameda County Cities and Presidents of Oro Loma, Castro
Valle ,/and Dubl n San Ramon Services Districts
FROM: Wil a F aley, Secretary Alameda County Solid Waste Management
Au o ity
SUBJECT: RATE REVIEW COORDINATION COMMITTEE SURVEY
Background
At its January, 1983 meeting, the County Solid Waste Management Authority
(SWMA) formed a Rate Review Coordination Committee to examine and make
recommendations regarding the relationship between the Authority and the
Refuse Rate Review Committee (RRRC). In particular, the Authority Committee
is to make recommendations concerning the collection and disbursal of
surcharge monies from importation of San Francisco solid waste.
The Authority Committee requested staff to prepare this survey in order to
get the input of City Councils and Boards on issues of concern. The
Committee will appreciate your response to the survey no later than April 25,
1983. Please return the Survey to William H. Fraley at the letterhead
address.
In answering this survey, please consider that there may be other proposals
to import waste that would not apply to the present franchise arrangement
with Oakland Scavenger Company.
A separate sheet containing background material relating to the Authority is
included for your information. Your representatives on the SWMA can assist
in providing background material relating to this request. The SWMA
appreciates your assistance in completing the survey.
Alternatives to Existing Refuse Rate Review Committee (RRRC)
(1) No change.
RRRC would remain responsible for making recommendations to local
jurisdictions (cities/special districts with solid waste franchises) on
refuse rates to be charged by Oakland Scavenger Company. RRRC would
continue to depend on staff of local agencies and Price—Waterhouse.
(4) Expansion of RRRC membership to include Berkeley, San Leandro and
Pleasanton.
Issues regarding solid waste disposal are of concern to the entire
county. Berkeley, San Leandro and- Pleasanton are involved and affected
by decisions concerning county landfill capacity, truck routes, and the
like.
Comment
Surcharge on Imported Solid Wastes
The following questions relate to both the existing surcharge agreement with
San Francisco and possible future surcharge agreements.
(5) Should the SWMA, RRRC or local franchising agencies (if franchises were
amended) be parties to the contract with San Francisco?
Only Oakland Scavenger Company, the City and County of San Francisco, and
San Francisco scavenger companies are parties to the existing contract to
import wastes.
Comments
(6) What agency/group should determine the amount of surcharge to be charged?
The RRRC is currently responsible for setting the surcharge; the matter
was referred to the RRRC by the SWMA.
—3—
Comments
(10) Who should receive surcharge revenue and who should make this
determination?
Some representatives favor distributing the funds to: 1) local
franchising jurisdictions that dispose wastes at Altamont landfill;
2) local franchising jurisdictions with contracts with Oakland Scavenger
Company; 3) local jurisdictions that suffer environmental impacts from
importation; 4) all local cities/franchising agencies; 5) the SWMA for
its countywide activities, 6) the County of Alameda.
Comments
(11) To what uses should surcharge revenues be put and who should make this
determination?
Some SWMA representatives believe that, since the purpose of the
surcharge is to mitigate a solid waste impact, the uses of revenue should
be restricted to a solid waste—related area such as lower collection
rates, local or countywide resource recovery and recycling programs, or
support of SWMA activities. Other representatives favor disbursing the
funds to cities/franchising agencies for any use, as determined by the
city or agency.
-5-
ALAMEDA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
A
In July, 1982 the Government Code was amended to require each county to
prepare, subject to the approval of the plan by a . majority of the cities
within the county, containing a majority of the population within the
unincorporated area of the County, a comprehensive, coordinated 'solid waste
management plan for all county waste to be disposed in or outside the County.
In June 1972, the County Planning Commission was designated by the Board of
Supervisors to handle solid waste management planning in the ,County. In
December, 1972, the Board of appointed a 23-member Solid Waste Management Plan
Advisory Committee consisting of elected officials, operators, the public and
representatives of the Health Planning Council. The County Planning Director
and staff served as staff members to the Committee and to the Technical
Advisory Committee since formation of both groups in early 1973. The County
Planning staff prepared the first Solid Waste Management Plan. That plan was
approved by the County and 92% of the cities representing 97% of the
incorporated population in 1976.
The cities and the County informed an Interim Council composed of the County,
thirteen cities and the Castro Valley, Oro Loma, and the Valley Community
Services District to address solid waste management issues. A Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement to work together on mutual solid waste problems was signed
by all seventeen entities.
The seventeen-member Solid Waste Management Authority, formed in 1976, has
been responsible for all solid waste management activities for the past seven
years. The Planning Director is Secretary to the Authority and the planning
Department provides staff support. The County Health Services Agency is
responsible for enforcement activities. The Planning Director, William H.
Fraley's is Secretary to the Authority and Clem Shute is Authority Attorney.
In early 1983, the City of Dublin became a member of the Authority, enlarging
the Board to eighteen members.
Responsibilities of the Authority are described in the Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement and the Rules of Procedures, both available from the County
Planning Department
The Solid Waste Management Plan was revised and approved in 1980 by the
Authority and the California Management Waste Board. The Authority and the
State have approved two subsequent amendments in 1981 and 1982. The most
recent amendment provided for import of San Francisco waste to Altamont for
the five year period 1983-1988. The enclosed questionnaire relates to the
five year import as well as proposed future San Francisco import following the
initial five year period.
-7-