HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.05 WasteMgtAlaCntyRpt (2)
e
e
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 10, 1994
SUBJECT:
Informational Report on Submittal of 1995 and 1996
Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc. (WMAC)
Garbage Rate Application (Prepared by: Lou Ann
Riera-Texeira, Assistant to the city Manager and Paul
S. Rankin, Assistant City Manager/Administrative
Services Director)
~
EXHIBITS: Letter Dated August 15, 1994 from WMAC Transmitting
the Rate Application
/'J,liV
RECOMMENDATION:~ Refer the Rate Application to the Joint Refuse Rate
Review Committee (JRRRC) for Review
FINANCIAL
STATEMENT:
Impact to the City of Dublin garbage rates will be
determined upon completion of 1995 Rate Application
review.
DESCRIPTION: The City of Dublin, along with a majority of cities in
Alameda County, contracts with Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc.
(WMAC) for waste collection services. The company collects waste in the
city of Dublin under a franchise agreement, which currently runs through
March of 1996. The terms of the current agreement authorize the City
Council to establish all garbage rates for services provided in the City
of Dublin. The agreement also provides that the revenue derived from the
company must cover their estimated expenses plus a reasonable rate of
return.
In August of 1994, WMAC submitted a two year rate application requesting
an increase in garbage rates covering 1995 and 1996. The Rate Application
is an integrated package encompassing landfill operations as well as
waste collection/transfer components. As indicated in the attached
letter, the 1995 Rate Application contains a number of major changes,
including a new two-year rate setting process (previously one year) and
elimination of the existing balancing account.
At this time, it is not possible to provide a detailed review of the rate
increase as it relates to the operations servicing the City of Dublin.
companywide, the 1995 Rate Application proposes an average 13.4% rate
increase for 1995 followed by an additional 3.6% rate increase for 1996.
The company has requested a significant change to the methodology used
to determine the allowed profit rate. In 1994, the City of Dublin allowed
the company profit based on a ratio of pre-tax operating expenses (i.e.,
if a ratio of 90% were used and the company had pre-tax expenses of $100
million, the company would be allowed a profit of $10 million). The
allowed Operating Ratio (OR) recommended in 1994 by the JRRRC and adopted
by the City Council was 93.25%. This was estimated to be equivalent to a
4.3% after tax profit. .
In the current rate application, the company proposes to use two different
"Operating Ratios." For collection activities, they have proposed an OR
of 88%; and for landfill operations, they have requested an OR of 71.5%.
Approximately 8.1% of the 1995 requested rate increase results from
proposed increases in profit and interest expense. The JRRRC consultant
will need to evaluate in detail the methodologies being proposed as well
as the basis for the request.
On an annual basis, the Dublin City Council has reviewed garbage rates
through a process undertaken by the Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee.
This Committee is comprised of various jurisdictions serviced by WMAC.
The Committee retains the services of an independent consultant to review
and analyze the rate application. Staff recommends receiving the 1995
and 1996 Rate Application and referring the Application to the JRRRC for
review and recommendations.
CC: Dan Borges, Livermore Dublin Disposal
Mary Evans, Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc.
4.5
~ e ..e
~, Waste Management of Alameda count~, Inc.
\~l Administrative Offices
~ 172 98th Avenue .
Oakland, California 94603-1004
510/430-8509 . Fax: 510/562-7280
August 15, 1994
. Mr. .Gary Breaux, Chairman
Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee
475 14th Street, 10th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Dear Mr. Breaux:
Attached is the technical submission of Waste Management of Alameda County's
(WMAC) Rate Application for 1995 and 1996. This application is being submitted in
compliance with Article 3, Section 2 of the jurisdictions' Franchise Agreements. This
submission is prepared based on the direction received from the Joint Refuse Rate'
Review Committee (JRRRC) directly and through its consultant. This letter summarizes
some of the highlights of the rate application and the treatment of a variety of items. This
rate application applies only to the years 1995 and 1996 and does not address any issues
or concerns WMAC may have with the rates of return and operating ratios recommended
by the JRRRC and adopted by its member jurisdictions in prior years.
Integration of Rate Application Components
The JRRRC has proposed several changes for regulation ofWMAC, including elimination
of the balancing account and a two-year rate setting process. WMAC has been
responsive to the JRRRC's wishes and developed this rate application to meet the
JRRRC's goals while providing the Company with appropriate compensation for its
operations. The rate application is an integrated .package - the components discusse.d
below are inherently related, and a change in the treatment of one component will have
necessary impacts on other components.
Basis for Budget Submissions
In the absence of direction from the JRRRC regarding a procedure for indexing the rates
approved for 1995 to set 1996 rates, WMAC is submitting proposed budgets for both
1995 and 1996. Also included, for informational purposes only, is a draft projected
budget for 1997. (See section marked "Technical Submission.") The 1995/1996
submission, including the treatment of costs associated with change in law and uncon-
trollable circumstances, the risks assumed by WMAC, and the requested profitability are
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e
e
Page 2
tied to the adoption of these budgets by the JRRRC and the enaction of rate ordinances
which will set rates for 1995 and 1996. The risk associated with changes in actual costs
from those budgeted, except for those specific items identified below, and shortfalls in
revenue other than those caused by jurisdiction failure to approve appropriate rate
increases, will be borne by WMAC.
Profitability
I
Waste Management of Alameda County requests allowed profitability be determined using
separate operating ratios for collection/transfer operations and for disposal operations.
This is consistent with the recommendations made by Barakat & Chamberlin in the
position paper submitted to the JRRRC earlier this month. The requested profitability is
consistent with the normal operational risks associated with waste management activities,
the additional risks associated with the elimination of the balancing account, and the
shifting of certain financial risk from the JRRRC members to WMAC. It also provides a
fair and appropriate return on the capital .which WMAC h~s vested in the operations.
Elimination of the Balancing Account
The JRRRC has proposed the elimination of the balancing account for the use of
accumulating deficits between actual revenues and actual expenses plus allowed
profitability effective January, 1995. The outstanding balance as of December 31, 1994,
will be fully reimbursed by the jurisdictions. WMAC's 1995/1996 rate application is
prepared on a basis consistent with the JRRRC's proposal, and has adjusted profitability
recommendations based on the additional risk associated with the elimination of the
balancing account. The Company faces risks, however, that cannot be appropriately
covered in the additional profitability requested. These include any costs or fees incurred
as a result of changes in law or regulation and uncontrollable circumstances (as detailed
in the Exhibits section of the rate application). WMAC proposes costs associated with
these items in a given year be included in the following year's budget.
Interest Treatment
The JRRRC jurisdictions currently reimburse WMAC for interest expense at a rate of
5.76%. This is lower than market interest rates and does not adequately reflect the long-
term nature of the capital expenditures as well as the balancing account amount. The
rate application is based on the use of tWo separate interest rates: (1) for the outstanding
balancing account, the weighted average cost of capital recommended by Arthur
Andersen in their position paper, "and (2) for all other interest expense, 9.5%.
e
e
Page 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Landfill Risks
There are a number of specific risks associated with the operation of the Altamont Landfill
which justify the profitability requested. These include the following:
· Risks a.ssociated with closure and post-closure maintenance. The funding levels
for closure/post-closure are based on current estimates. These estimates, while
the best currently available, are revised annually, and may vary substantially from
the actual cost of landfill closure/post-closure maintenance costs, both due to
gene.ral increases in costs and the possibility of increased regulatory requirements
enacted after the expiration of the franchises.
· While WMAC has a commitment of waste streams from the JRRRC members,
there is still substantial volume risk related to decreases in construction activity,
and increased solid waste diversion activity (including recycling and green waste
programs).
· WMAC, like other landfill operations, is subject to the competitive market. While
the JRRRC members have made waste stream commitments through their
franchise terms, there is the possibility for significant competition from other
facilities after the expiration of these agreements (including potential competition
from the Alameda County Waste Management Authority).
· There are risks which WMAC proposes be borne by the JRRRC members,
including changes in law and regulation and uncontrollable circumstances. (See
Exhibits section for more details.) This protection of WMAC, however, may only
last as long as the franchise agreements. Therefore, our profitability today needs
to reflect the potential liability which may ultimately stem from current operations
and the need to protect and maintain the landfill site for a minimum of thirty years
(30) beyond final closure.
Capital Budget
The submission includes the capital budget previously submitted to the JRRRC on June
15th. We have determined the changes proposed by the JRRRC do not materially affect
this capital budget.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
.
.
e
e
Page 4
Performance Standards
This technical submission is submitted in accordance with the requirements of our
franchise agreements. We believe the changes proposed herein enhance our ability to
manage the Company's operations in the most cost-effective way while consistently
providing high quality service. WMAC will continue to comply with its contractual
obligations by providing the JRRRC and its member with timely information and
responsive customer service. We are prepared to work with the JRRRC and its
consultants to develop a set of reasonable performance standards with which to evaluate
customer service and our responsiveness to the jurisdictions' informational requirements.
Key Assumptions
The rate application is based on several assumptions related to labor costs, head count,
and other operating and maintenance costs. These .are detailed further in the section
entitled "Exhibits."
In accordance with the Franchise Agreements, the 1993 Waste Management of Alameda
County financial statements are enclosed.
Waste Management of Alameda County is sensitive to the fact that elimination of the
balancing account as well as other components of this rate application will result in very
different rate adjustment requirements among the JRRRC's members. We are prepared
to work with the individual jurisdictions to design an approach to rate setting and franchise
management which will provide for fair and reasonable rate setting while providing quality,
cost-effective service to our ratepayers.
Sincerely,
II
'--2
D. David MacDonald
Executive Vice President
Vt[~^1 S--G~
Mary S. Evans
Vice President & Controller
I'.
.,
I
.
.
DDMIMSElsd
MSE94094.s
Attachment
cc: JRRRC Members
Erik Gilberg, Deloitte &T0uche