Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.1 Oakland Scavenger Rate Adjustment r CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 23, 1991 SUBJECT: Written Communication: Oakland Scavenger Company (OSC) 1992 Rate Adjustment Request P�(Prepared by: Paul S. Rankin, Assistant City Manager) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: Letter dated August 20, 1991 from D. David MacDonald, E.V.P. , Oakland Scavenger Company RECOMMENDATION: Receive the Report and Direct the Request to the Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee (JRRRC) for Further Analysis. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: OSC is requesting an increase in 1992 which would generate an additional 13 percent in revenue company-wide. Due to a new method used by the JRRRC, actual increases will differ from this amount as described below. DESCRIPTION: In the past OSC has submitted rate applications to the JRRRC. After review, the Committee identified a uniform increase required by all agencies to generate the required revenue. As described in the 1991-92 Budget, the JRRRC has elected to undertake a cost of service study. This study will develop a methodology which will implement the 1992 rate increase on a jurisdictional basis. The rate application will identify the projected cost of service by jurisdiction. Therefore, the projected companywide figures presented in Mr. Macdonald's letter will differ by agency. As part of the 1991 rate application review, the JRRRC deleted certain expenses for further consideration. The expenses were associated with: Landfill Closure/Post Closure expenses, Lawsuit Defense costs, and an Altamont Adjustment for Non-Franchised Assets. As stated in the 1991 rate application staff report, these areas represented significant issues which would impact rates in future years. The JRRRC undertakes the review based primarily upon projections of revenue and expenditures. Any difference in the projections will impact the adequacy of the rate adjustment. As described during the 1991 rate review, OSC maintains a balancing account. When OSC revenues exceeded necessary expenses, these funds were used to offset rate increases. The balancing account is currently in a deficit position with OSC expenses exceeding the required revenues. In addition, due to economic factors and the deferral of certain costs from the 1991 application,, the deficit has increased. The JRRRC is just beginning to analyze the reasons for this increase and will be identifying a policy recommendation for handling the deficit. The JRRRC has also undertaken a Management Audit which utilizes an independent review of OSC operations. The audit is being conducted by a Consultant Team consisting of the Rate Review Consultant (Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson) and SCS Engineers. SCS will be responsible for reviewing technical operations and efficiency issues related to the collection and disposal operations. It is anticipated that this report will be available at the same time as the final rate review study and will provide valuable information in considering the rate application. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council receive this report and direct the JRRRC to analyze the application and report back with a recommendation. a:s923jrrc.doc.agenda#5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COPIES TO: D. David MacDonald, OSC Dan Borges, Livermore Dublin Disposal ITEM N0. � ®�� CITY CLERK FILE 181 G+aklancFScavenger Company ;.Administrative Offices A Waste Management Company 2000 Embarcadero, Suite 300 Oakland, CA 94606 415/532-1400 Fax: 415/532-1465 August 30, 1991 RECEIVED Mr. Paul Causey, Chairman Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee CFp _ 3 1991 P. 0. Box 95 San Lorenzo, CA 94580 ORO LOMA SANITARY DISTRICT Dear Mr. Causey: As requested by the Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee, we have submitted rate applications as follows: Technical Submission, dated July 15, 1991 Jurisdictional Submission, dated August 15, ' 1991 Based on the results of these submissions, our Company is requesting the following revenue adjustments: 1992 1993 1994 Estimated Estimated Overall increase (Note 1) 13% 13% 10% Note (1) Oakland, Hayward and Livermore increases will be less than otherwise would have been required because their current rates are higher than requested January 1, 1991 due to delaying their 1991 rate increases until April 1, 1991. We understand that it is the Committee's intention to institute varying rate increase percentages by jurisdiction based on cost of service and an equitable contribution to Oakland Scavenger Company' s allowed return. The requested overall increases noted above, anticipate bringing the balancing amount to zero by the end of 1994 , however the jurisdictions (and Committee) decision on the methodology to allocate the balancing account will potentially impact each jurisdictions own percentage increases. t Page 2 The impact of the reversal of Measure D fees has not been taken into account in the above overall percentage increases requested. Various options may be available to the jurisdiction as to how to deal with the reversal. Additionally, closing and post-closing costs need to be addressed as indicated in our earlier correspondence. Should you have any questions, please contact Mike Griffin or me. Since el D. David MacDonald Executive Vice President DDM/sp DDM91085.s cc: Joint Refuse Rate Review Committee Members Mike Griffin