Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEDCO Disposal Corporation - Rate Adjustment and Modifications - 1993city of National City, California COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE June 22, 1993 AGENDA ITEM NO. 14 ITEM TITLE RESOLUTION APPROVING A TRASH SERVICE RATE INCREASE FOR EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION AND MODIFYING THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT PREPARED BY C. R. Williams, EXPLANATION See attached. DEPARTMENT Public Works See report on franchise fee and city services as requested at 8 June meeting. Environmental Review x N/A Financial Statement Burden of rate increase will fall on all recipients of trash service. Franchise fee of 5% gross will be paid to city. Account No. N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVE RATES AS SUBMITTED II tESOLUTION AND APPROVE CONTRACT CHANGES. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION NIA ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) 1. EDCO letter 2. Deloitte & Touche "Engagement" and "Report" (27 April) 3. Franchise Fee and City Services Report x Resolution No 93-R6 A-200 (Rev. 9/80) RESOLUTION NO. 9 3 - 8 6 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY WITH EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION WHEREAS, on September 25, 1990, the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation ("Edco") entered into an agreement entitled "Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered;" and WHEREAS, the City and Edco now desire to amend various provisions of said agreement, including those provisions pertaining to the rates charged by Edco; and WHEREAS, a public hearing as required by law was held on June 8, 1993, in the City Council Chambers, 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, to consider the proposed rate increase. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of National City that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an Amendment to the agreement with Edco Disposal Corporation, dated September 25, 1990, and entitled "Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered." Said Amendment to Agreement is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. PASSED and ADOPTED this 22nd day of June, 1993. ATTEST: n Q Lori)Anne Peoples, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III City Attorney • George H. aters, Mayor Passed and adopted by the Council of the City of National City, California, on June 22. 1993 by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Councilmen Dal1 a, Inzunza, Zarate, Waters Nays: Councilmen Morrison Absent: Councilmen None Abstain: Councilmen None AUTHENTICATED BY: GEORGE H. WATERS By: Mayor of the City of National City, California City lerk of the City of National Cit , California Deputy I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and cor- rect copy of RESOLUTION NO.....9.3.-.86 of the City of National City, Calif., passed and adopted by the Council of said City on ...�l.u.ne...2a.....1993 (Seal) By: City Clerk of the City of National City, California Deputy AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY This Amendment to Agreement is made and entered into this 22nd day of June, 1993, by and between the City of National City, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and Edco Disposal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." RECITALS A. On September 25, 1990, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into an, agreement entitled "Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered." B. CITY and CONTRACTOR now desire to amend various provisions of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree to amend the following provisions of the Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered, as follows: 1. Section 2.D., entitled "Definitions" 'Recyclable Material'" is hereby amended to read as follows: D. "RECYCLABLE MATERIAL" means "Designated Recyclable Materials" as defined in Section 9.52.010 of the National City Municipal Code. 2. Section 7 is amended to read as follows: DUMP SITE: Contractor shall use disposal sites designated by CITY. In this regard, Contractor shall pay whatever reasonable use fees are charged for such a designated disposal site, and said fees shall be an operating expense for purposes of setting rates hereunder. In any event, Contractor will not burn any combustible substances within the City of National City. All disposal activities of Contractor shall be conducted in such a way as to enhance, and not impair, the health, welfare, sanitation and safety of the people of the City of National City. 1 3. That the National City Rate Schedule shall be as shown on Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, beginning July 1, 1993. 4. Except as otherwise provided herein, all of the provisions of the Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered, dated September 25, 1990, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands on the date first above stated. APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III City Attorney 2 ,4 George H. aters, Mayor EDCO DISPPSAL CORPORATION Byv By: t(i"-6/14 NATIONAL CITY RATE SCHEDULE JULY 1, 1993 RUBBISH AND GARBAGE 1. RESIDENTIAL Per month residential single family properties. For the second and for each additional residential unit in multiple dwellings which do not exceed four units 2. TRAILER PARRS AND MOTELS One time per week, per unit, per month 3. APARTMENT HOUSES One time per week, per unit per month 4. SENIOR -CITIZEN RESIDENTIAL Per month MONTHLY RATE 13.55 10.45 9.65 9.80 10.50 EXHIBIT "A" NATIONAL CITY RATE SCHEDULE JULY 1, 1993 RUBBISH AND GARBAGE (COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ESTABLISHMENTS) Up to (2) 40 gallon containers One time per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Two times per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Three times per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Four times per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Daily (six days/Monday-Saturday) Additional or unusual accumulation of rubbish (per cubic yard) MONTHLY RATE 15.95 25.40 32.65 40.35 52.70 9.55 NATIONAL CITY RATE SCHEDULE JULY 1, 1993 BOX TYPE REFUSE SERVICE NUMBER COLLECTION YARDS PER MONInLY OF BINS FREQUENCY MONTH RATE 1 1 13 84.35 1 2 26 135.85 1 3 39 187.15 1 4 52 238.60 1 5 65 290.05 1 6 78 341.35 1 7 91 422.60 2 1 26 171.45 2 2 52 270.60 2 3 78 371.65 2 4 104 477.20 2 5 130 553.00 2 6 156 629.70 2 7 182 739.70 3 1 39_ 180.75 3 2 78 196.95 3 3 117 543.05 3 4 156 630.15 3 5 195 814.65 3 6 234 980.55 3 7 273 1,209.70 4 1 52 306.70 4 2 104 499.70 4 3 156 693.35 4 4 208 811.90 4 5 260 1,048.20 4 6 312 1,180.80 4 7 364 1,555.25 BOX TYPE REFUSE SERVICE CONT'D. BOX TYPE REFUSE SERVICE CONT'D. NUMBER COLLECTION YARDS PER MONTHLY OF BINS FREQUENCY •MONTH RATE 5 1 65 364.40 5 2 130 604.40 5 3 195 844.85 5 4 260 1,037.45 5 5 325 1,245.80 5 6 390 1,503.80 5 7 455 1,844.80 6 1 78 421.75 6 2 156 709.05 6 3 234 996.40 6 4 312 1,146.60 6 5 390 1,388.30 6 6 468 1,689.70 6 7 546 2,078.00 TRASH RATE FRANCHISE FEE AND CITY SERVICES REPORT City Council, at its meeting of 8 June to consider a trash rate increase for the city's franchised solid waste hauler, requested that the item be laid over for further consideration of two specific elements of the rate increase, namely the franchise fee and city services. FRANCHISE FEE: In many contexts, a franchise fee is considered equivalent to a business license fee and is a cost of doing business in the city. There is high validity to this concept in a free market type situation where the business can modify his charges to accommodate such fees. Where there is a franchise of the nature of the city's current trash franchise agreement, such is not the case. By the franchise agreement itself, contractor can charge only that rate approved by the City Council. That rate must be developed from latest audited company books and is subject to review and report by an outside audit firm selected by city to ensure the reasonableness and propriety of rate development docu- mentation. The contractor has no latitude to adjust his fees to accommodate changes in the franchise fee. It therefore is separately stated. It should be noted that by separately stating the franchise fee the contractor does not benefit from a windfall in calculating the CPI increase, since the total franchise fee is removed before the CPI increase is applied. The franchise fee has been calculated and so stated for a number of years. CITY SERVICES: The contract states that contractor shall collect trash from city -owned property without charge to the city. Similar verbiage is in the 1962 contract between the city and National City Rubbish Service - "It is specifically agreed between the parties that no charge shall be made to the City of National City for collection of garbage and rubbish from city -owned property ...." The cost of so doing was included in the rate structure charge to citizens. In 1975 the contract was assigned to EDCO. In 1977, the contract was extended to 1982 and minor modification made. Specifically, the verbiage was given section headings and changed slightly to read, "Section 10. FREE SERVICE TO CITY: Contractor shall collect garbage ana-ilabbish from City -owned property, as frequently as is necessary to prevent the accumulation of rubbish or garbage on City -owned property, without charge to the City." The cost for providing this service is included within the price structure approved for rate setting. In the mid-1980's the handling of sweeper sweepings surfaced as a problem. A tradeoff was established between city and contractor that disposal of sweeper sweepings (which TRASH RATE FRANCHISE FEE AND CITY SERVICES REPORT 2 heretofore has been handleby city staff) would be included as a contractor -provided city service, in exchange for city permitting temporary storage of roll -off containers on cur- rently unused city property. In the 1990 revision to the contract, city service was modified to include disposition of sweeper sweepings: "SECTION 11. SERVICE TO CITY: Contractor shall collect garbage and rubbish from City -owned property as frequently as is necessary to prevent the accumulation of rubbish and garbage on City -owned property, without charge to City. Collection service includes removal of sweeping debris." Not only was removal of sweeping debris formally added to the contract, but also additional services were added, including: increasing the citywide cleanup from once a year to twice a year, adding a bulky item pick-up service and a refrigerator door program. These programs were also defined as "a basic business cost to be included in overall rate establishment and without additional charge to the customer," by the contract. The intent of the 1980 and 1990 contracts, to a certainty, is that the franchise fee at 2% of gross in 1980, and at 5% escalating by 1% per year for the duration of the contract in the 1990 revision were separate cost elements of the contract and come right off the top of the gross income. Similarly the cost of "free" services to the city is and has been a cost element of the rate structure. SUMMARY: Both these costs must be paid from the gross income of the contractor - there is no other way. For a number of years they have been treated as a cost element of the rate structure due to the rate control of the franchise. It may confuse the issue by having the contractor state those costs up front, but it was done in the interest of full disclosure of all cost elements involved in the rate determination. City of National City Office of the City Clerk 1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4397 Lori Anne Peoples - City Clerk (619) 336-4226 July 6. 1993 Mr. Edward Burr. President EDCO Disposal Corporation 6670 Federal Boulevard Lemon Grove. California 91945 Dear Mr. Burr: Enclosed is a certified copy of Resolution No. 93-86 which was adopted by the City Council of the City of National City on June 22. 1993. Also enclosed is a fully -executed original Amendment to Agreement which was authorized by said Resolution. nie Daniels. Secretary to the City Clerk Enclosures (2) ® Recycled Paper tit), of National City, California COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT 7 MEETING DATE June 8, 1993 AGENDA ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE RESOLUTION APPROVING A TRASH SERVICE RATE INCREASE FOR EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION AND MODIFYING THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT PREPARED BY C. R. Williams,. Jr//DEPARTMENT Public Works EXPLANATION, See attached. Environmental Review Financial Statement N/A Burden of rate increase will fall on all recipients of trash service. Franchise fee of 5% gross will be paid to city. Account No N/A TAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVE RATES AS SUBMITTED IN RESOLUN AND APPROVE CONTRACT CHANGES. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIOIC N/A ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) 1. EDCO letter 2. Deloitte & Touche "Engagement" and "Report" (27 April) x Resolution No 93-69 A-200 (Rev. 9/80) RESOLUTION NO. 93-69 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN CITY OF NATIONAL CITY WITH EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION WHEREAS, on September 25, 1990, the Cit of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation entered into an agreement entitled Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and . -tween the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Render: +;" and WHEREAS, the City and Edco no - desire to amend various provisions of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE of National City that the Mayor is her agreement with Edco Disposal Co "Agreement for Collection of Rub between the City of National Rendered." Said Amendment ATTEST: Lori Ann: Peoples, City Clerk APP ° OVED AS TO FORM: RESOLVED by the City Council of the City y authorized to execute an Amendment to the ration, dated September 25, 1990, and entitled ish and Trash in the City of National City by and ity and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services o Agreement is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. I PASSED an+ ADOPTED this 8th day of June, 1993. George H. Eiser, III City Attorney George H. Waters, Mayor �iG P- rE2) AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY This Amendment to Agreement is made and entered into this 8th day of June, 1993, by and between the City of National City, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and Edco Disposal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." RECITALS A. On September 25, 1990, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into an agreement entitled "Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered." B. CITY and CONTRACTOR now desire to amend various provisions of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree to amend the following provisions of the Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered, as follows: 1. Section 2.D., entitled "Definitions" 'Recyclable Material'" is hereby amended to read as follows: D. "RECYCLABLE MATERIAL" means "Designated Recyclable Materials" as defined in Section 9.52.010 of the National City Municipal Code. 2. Section 7 is amended to read as follows: DUMP SITE: Contractor shall use disposal sites designated by CITY. In this regard, Contractor shall pay whatever reasonable use fees are charged for such a designated disposal site, and said fees shall be an operating expense for purposes of setting rates hereunder. In any event, Contractor will not burn any combustible substances within the City of National City. All disposal activities of Contractor shall be conducted in such a way as to enhance, and not impair, the health, welfare, sanitation and safety of the people of the City of National City. 1 3. Section 16 is amended to read as follows: FRANCHISE FEE: Beginning on July 1, 1993, Contractor will pay to the City of National City as a franchise fee a sum of money equal to five percent (5 %) of Contractor's gross collections derived from services rendered pursuant to this agreement. The franchise fee shall, at City's option, increase by 1 % on July 1 of each succeeding year for the remainder of the contract term. Said franchise fee will be payable on the 20th day of each month. City shall have the right, at reasonable times and places, to inspect contractor's books and records to insure the proper and correct payment of the franchise fee. 4. Except as otherwise provided herein, all of the provisions of the Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered, dated September 25, 1990, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands on the date first above stated. APPROVED AS TO FORM: George H. Eiser, III City Attorney 2 George H. Waters, Mayor EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION By: By: Deloitte & Touche May 5, 1993 Mr. C. R. Williams, Jr. Public Works Department City of National City 2100 Hoover Avenue National City, California 91950-6599 Dear Mr. Williams: Suite 1900 Telephone: (619) 232-6500 701 " B" Street [ ITT Telex: 4995722 San Diego, California 921Q`f-8498, ':', F'asimile: (619) 237-1755 We have applied certain agreed -upon procedures, as discussed below, to accounting records and other items as related to EDCO Disposal Corporation ("EDCO") and San Diego Recycling ("Recycling"), as requested by you to assist you in evaluating your contractual relationship with EDCO and Recycling. It is understood that this report is intended for use of the City Council of National City and the management of EDCO and Recycling. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. The procedures we performed, which relate primarily to your fiscal year 1994 residential refuse rate, are summarized as follows: 1. We read EDCO's internally prepared financial statements for the nine months ended February 28, 1993, and the audited financial statements for the year ended May 31, 1992. We inquired of Alder, Green & Hasson (independent certified public accountants for EDCO) and Dan Gallaher (Controller for EDCO), as to any changes in accounting policies and methods of application which might affect the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate for the City. 2. We reviewed the recalculation of the fiscal 1993 residential refuse rate, which has been used as a basis for the fiscal 1994 rate adjustment. 3. We obtained and reviewed information which supports the Consumer Price Index adjustment as calculated by EDCO. 4. We reviewed EDCO's calculation of franchise fees due to the City for the period from May 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993, to ascertain that they were calculated based on revenues as reported in EDCO's underlying financial records and that they were in accordance with contractual requirements. DeleitteTouche Tohmatsu International 5. We reviewed franchise fee remittances made to National City by EDCO for the period from. May 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993 to ascertain that they were made on a timely basis. 6. We reviewed San Diego County landfill fee increases projected during the fiscal year 1993 rate review process, and agreed actual increases to supporting documentation. We agreed actual tipping charges and tons of waste to supporting documentation for five judgementally selected days for the period from June 1992 to February 1993. 7. We reviewed the reasonableness of projected fiscal 1994 San Diego County landfill fee increases on the rate calculation. 8. We ascertained that one-time adjustments to the fiscal 1993 rate review were properly excluded from the fiscal 1994 rate review. 9. We reviewed the calculation of actual vs. projected revenues from the sale of recyclables related to the fiscal 1993 rate, and the corresponding adjustment to the 1994 rate, for reasonableness. 10. We agreed total tons of recyclable materials sold to underlying accounting records and related supporting work tickets for two judgementally selected months. 11. We compared the estimated price per ton of recyclables used for calculating the projected fiscal year 1994 rates with documentation which supports actual prices currently in force for two judgementally selected dates. 12. We reviewed the calculation of the cost of the green waste service program, including landfill diversion, and through discussion with Dan Gallaher compared it to a program in place for another municipality serviced by EDCO. 13. We reviewed the calculation of the franchise fee and the effect of its increase to 5% on the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate calculation. 14. We performed a review of insurance in force, through discussion with Mike Fellows of EDCO, to ascertain that coverage levels were in compliance with contractual requirements. In connection with the procedures referred to above, no matters came to our attention that caused us to believe that the specified accounts or the final calculation of items noted above, as they relate to the fiscal 1994 rate calculation prepared for the City by EDCO (attached as Exhibit A) should be adjusted. Because the above procedures do not constitute an audit made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, we do not express an opinion on any of the accounts or items referred to above. Had we performed additional procedures or had we made an audit of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report related only to the accounts and items specified above and does not extend to any financial statements of EDCO, taken as a whole. Very truly yours, Zer-04: € 7� Attachment E)tIIBIT A NATIONAL CITY - RATE REVIEW 1993 Effective July 1, 1993 % of Revenue Residential Commercial Current rate 11.10 70.60 C. P. I. 1.39% 0.15 0.96 Tip Fee Increase (assuming $43, eff. 7/1/93) 17.22% 1.91 12.16 Effect of Increasing Market Prices of Recyclabies (net) -0.79% -0.09 -0.58 Reverse Prior Yr. Annualization Adj. -0.67 Cost of Yard Waste Program 93-94 5.46% 0.81 3.85 Cost of Yard Waste Program 92-93 -1.22 Sub -total (including Current Franchise Fee) 13.68 85.12 Leas: Current Franchise Fee (2%) 2.00% 0.22 1.41 Sub -total before Franchise Fee 13.46 83.71 5% Franchise Fee 0.71 4.41 PROPOSED RATES 27.66% 14.17 88.12 24.81% .........n.a.... .......v...................... n..a ..... ... nv::n:.v::._::::: :.:. n: .....ln:n:. -::::..... ,.....: �::: nvx:::: n. C. P. I. ADJUSTMENT Revenues per Feb 28, '93 F/S 2,187,377 45,082 Francise Fee Dump Cost per Feb 28, '93 F/S 696,939 742,021 Dump & Franchise Fee Percentage Dump to Revenue 31.86% 33.92% Applicable C. P. 1. Rate 2.10% C. P. 1. Rate reduced by dump % 1.43% 1.39% ...{..............n ...........................................:.......:................................ n........:. inv::.:': x::.:: \v::::ply.::.:.-�!{.:{.:{Jllli}i}i}ism?}5::.}:::.v::::nv.C::::}}:{n: TIP FEE INCREASE ACTUAL.- 9 MONTHS TONS TIP FEE RATE Jun-92 3,111.44 71,803.48 $23 JuI-92 3,180.66 73,505.39 $23 .,.,. pug-92 2,981.65 68,247.16 $23 Sep-92 2,933.74 82,144.61 $28 Oct-92 2,926.88 81,952.16 $28 Nov-92 2,599.20 72,777.46 $28 Dec-92 2,904.15 81,316.20 $28 Jan-93 2,989.29 83,700.08 $28 Feb-93 2,915.86 81,644.01 S28 26,522.85 897,090.55 Mar-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 82,220.13 $28 Apr-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 82,220.13 $28 May-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 82,220.13 $28 8,809.30 246,660.40 TIP FEE IN CURRENT RATE PROJECTED 35,332.15 943,750.95 2,355.05 11,775.24 $5 37,887.20 955,526.19 1,013,974.00 -58,447.81 TONS TIP FEE RATE Jun-93 3,111.44 87,120.32 $28 Jul-93 3,180.66 136,768.38 $43 Aug-93 2,961.65 127,350.95 S43 ,Sep-93 2,933.74 126,150.82 443 )ct-93 2,926.86 125,854.98 $43 1,1ov-93 2,599.20 111,765.60 $43 Dee-93 2,904.15 124,878.45 $43 Jan-94 2,989.29 128,539.47 $43 Feb-94 2,915.86 125,381.98 $43 26,522.85 1,093,810.95 Mar-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,938.43 126,266.83 $43 Apr-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 126,266.63 $43 May-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 126,266.83 $43 FREE SERVICE PROJECTED TIP FEE ACTUAL. TIP FEE 8,809.30 378,799.90 35,332.15 1,472,810.85 2,355.05 47,100.95 $20 37,687.20 1, 519, 711.80 1,519,711.80 955,526.19 PROJECTED INCREASE 564,185.61 PRIOR YEAR OVERAGE ACTUAL REVENUE-9 MONTHS PROJ. REVENUE - 3 MONTHS -58,447.81 -58,447.81 505,737.80 2,187,377.00 750,000.00 2,937,377.00 PERCENTAGE INCREASE 17.22% El T OF INCREASING MARKET PRICES OF RECYCLABLES Forecasted Revenues from Sales of Recyclablee Forecasted Tons Recycled Forecasted Average Revenues per Ton ACTUAL - 9 MONTHS 782.65 21.16 TONS REVENUES AVG/TON Jun-92 76.33 1,429.15 18.72 Jul-92 69.97 2,035.90 29.10 Aug-92 74.33 1,754.48 23.60 Sep-92 79.80 1,780.59 22.31 0ct-92 71.53 1,475.60 20.63 Nov-92 73.04 1,593.75 21.82 Dec-92 85.25 2,204.53 25.86 Jan-93 73.08 1,899.52 25.99 Feb-93 67.63 1,643.82 24.31 Mar-93 (PROJECTED) Apr-93 (PROJECTED) May-93 (PROJECTED) ACTUAL + 3 MO. PROJ. REVENUES ANNUALIZED OVERAGE 9 MONTH OVERAGE ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS 670.96 15,817.34 23.57 70.56 75.43 66.86 1,791.52 1,963.44 1,573.22 212.85 5,328.18 25.39 26.03 23.53 16,562.11 ORIGINAL 0 16,562.11 REVISED 883.81 23.93 21,145.52 4,583.41 3,428.50 2,187,377.00 OVERRECOVERED REVENUES FROM SALES OF RECYCLABLES -0.16% 74.80% 74.80% CL NT YEAR REVENUES FROM SALES OF RECYCLABLES PROJECTED TONS 883.81 PROJECTED REVENUE PER TON BASED ON 1/93 & 2/93 25.15 22,227.12 PREVIOUS ANNUAL PROJECTED REVENUE 16,562.11 PROJECTED ADDITIONAL OVERAGE ADJUST TO 9 MONTHS (9/12) ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS SUB -TOTAL LESS: REVERSAL OF PRIOR YEAR'S UNRECOVERED REVENUES COST OF YARD WASTE PROGRAM 5,665.01 4,248.76 2,187,377.00 -0.19% -0.35% -0.44% -0.79% RUBBISH COLLECTION ONLY 1 - 3 AXLE TRUCK W/ 2 MEN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 2 - 2 AXLE TRUCKS W/ 1 MAN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS RUBBISH AND YARD WASTE 1 - 3 AXLE TRUCK W/ 2 MEN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 2 - 2 AXLE TRUCKS W/ 1 MAN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 1 - 2 AXLE TRUCK W/ 1 MAN - 5 - 9 HOUR DAYS ADDITIONAL COLLECTION COST RELATED TO YARD WASTE HOURLY RATE $125 21,650 $90 31,176 $125 21,650 $90 31,176 $90 17,537 52,828 70,363 17,537 LESS: TIP FEE SAVINGS EST. 7,300 HOMES AT 15 POUNDS PER HOME PER WEEK TIMES 4.33 WEEKS PER MONTH 237 LANDFILL TRASH FEE $43 LANDFILL YARD WASTE FEE $25 $18 NET COST OF YARD WASTE PROGRAM PER MONTH MULTIPLY BY 9 MONTHS ACTUAL REVENUE-9 MONTHS 4,287 13,269 119,424 2,187,377 5.46% uty of National City, California COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE June 8, 1993 2 AGENDA ITEM NO. % ITEM TITLE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A TRASH SERVICE RATE INCREASE FOR EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION AND MODIFICATION OF THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT PREPARED BY C. R. Williams, Jr./7 DEPARTMENT Public Works EXPLANATION See attached. Environmental Review X N/A Financial Statement A Burden of rate increase will fall on all recipients of trash service. Franchise fee of 5% gross will be paid to city. Account No. N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION N/A ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) 1. EDCO letter 2. Deloitte & Touche "Engagement" and "Report" (27 April) Resolution No. N/A A-200 (Rev. 9/80) COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A TRASH SERVICE RATE INCREASE FOR EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION AND MODIFICATION OF THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT. EXPLANATION I. REVISED RATE SCHEDULE A. The current contract with EDCO permits a yearly rate increase request. By the agreement, such rate increase is limited to the CPI for San Diego and will equal the % change in the index, with a cap of 6%. There are a number of city-directed/contractor-provided services that are included in the basic rate, and for which no charge is levied at the time of service: semi-annual citywide cleanup, city trash and city litter can pickup, bulky item pickup, the refrigerator door safety program, and the citywide curbside program. There are other elements of cost not in the basic rate: County tip fees are "pass -through" costs. The monies obtained from the sale of recyclable materials are used to offset other elements of cost. Receipts for the budget year are estimated for rate purpose based upon estimated quantity of recyclables and price and are adjusted when actuals are known. The green waste program is under development and annual costs are estimated (as are tip fees offset), with corrections to be applicable next year. B. The rate adjustment letter from EDCO, appended, shows the rates being proposed, the summary of rate change elements, the calculations for the CPI adjustment, tip fee impacts, sale of recyclables adjustments, projected costs for yard waste program including reduced tip fee for yard waste, and the cost of "FREE" services. An additional part of EDCO's letter includes rates for both residential and commercial for surrounding jurisdictions as a basis of comparison with the rate proposed. C. Summarizing; the proposed FY 94 trash rate attached contains the contractually established CPI index increase, the whopping county tipping fee increase from $28/ton to an estimated $43/ton, the 5% franchise fee, and expansion of the green waste program to a full year. It has been adjusted (based upon nine months actual and three months estimated) for over/under in the estimated total tonnage of trash, the total tonnage of green waste, the total amount of recyclable materials sold, and the rate actually received for such sale. -2- D. Elemental impacts are as follows: Current rate $11.10 CPI increase 0.15 Tip fee increase 1.91 Better recycling market -0.09 Yard waste program 0.61 5% FRANCHISE, NET 0.49 Proposed new rate $14.17 with commercial rates $70.60 for a 3-yard same service. = 5% of = 62% " = -3% = 20% = 16% = 28% total increase n n increase u being at 25%, increasing from bin once a week to $88.12 for the E. The rate changes proposed were developed by EDCO, based upon their audited statements for thir fiscal year ending 31 May 1992 and internal financial documents through 28 February 1993. These data have been reviewed again this year by the independent and highly esteemed audit firm (selected by the city and paid by EDCO) of Deloitte & Touche. The engagement letter and report from Deloitte & Touche are appended. F. The rates proposed are fair and equitable, and approval is recommended. II. PROPOSED CONTRACT PROVISIONS CHANGES A. City direction of trash. The present contract permits the contractor to furnish his own dump site or, with 30 days notice, to use a county dump site as directed by the city. In any agreement to be signed, either with the county or generally in the city's best interest, city should have the authority to direct its trash to any disposal, without reservation. A modification to the contract is required to ensure that the city has that right. The required modification is indicated by strikeout for parts to be deleted, and CAPS UNDERLINED for parts to be added. "SECTION 7. DUMP SITE: Contractor shall ¢,ijt}iot #o t g tt$11010411 t 6004111$tpeillOt use disposal sites Pt031 91//tO1MOY1t 1NIWY'1Of/$4010t05495 AS DIRECTED BY CITY. In any event, Contractor will not burn any combustible substances within the City of National City. All disposal activities of Contractor shall be conducted in such a way as to enhance, and not impair, the health, welfare, sanitation and safety of the people of the City of National City. YT4595$11301104Y$11Ntt i 00110W0011164141100Y1t04AttO -3- Uo/1#0,11 //t00#0000X010$010f1$0 10100$ 000410tOPO $tto. In this regard, Contractor shall pay whatever reasonable use fees are charged for such a designated disposal site, and said fees shall be an operating expense for purposes of setting rates hereunder." B. Franchise Fee The contract with EDCO, 25 September 1990, called for the franchise fee to increase to 5% on 1 October 1992, and to escalate by 1% per year for each succeeding year for the term of the contract. During subsequent rate deliberations, Council has directed, and the contractor has agreed, that the franchise fee remain at 2%. In view of the increasing city costs associated with trash reduction the fee has been established at the 5% figure originally determined. The yearly escalation by 1% is to be effective as an automatic increase in the contract. Required modification to the contract would be as follows: "SECTION 16. FRANCHISE FEE. As a franchise fee, Contractor will pay the City of National City a sum of money equal to .00/1150tooNi //,(gy p FIVE PERCENT (5%) of Contractor's gross collections derived from services rendered pursuant to this agreement. The franchise fee y6t,li MAY, AT CITY'S OPTION, increase wwo##o¢u 00t0160t11X//11.M//0t0//NXXX/140t00$0 by i% on July 1 of each succeeding year for the remainder of the contract term. Said franchise fee will be payable on the 20th day of each month. City shall have the right, at reasonable times and places, to inspect Contractor's books and records to insure the proper and correct payment of the franchise fee." 1 1 DISPOSAL CORPORATION Lemon Gro ei Cal feornaia 91945 (619) 287-7555 A PROPOSAL FOR THE CITY OF NA T/ONAL CITY FROM EDCO DISPOSAL Printed on Recycled Paper TABLE OF CONTENTS PROPOSAL LETTER PROPOSED RATE SCHEDULES RATE REVIEW COST OF CITY SERVICES RATE COMPARISONS ..:: ..t bb7Cf i=eral Boulevard [ [? AL �CORPORATIOIV edLemon Grove California 91945 (619) 287 755 May 10, 1993 City of National City 1243 National Avenue National City, CA 92050 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: The Refuse Collection & Recycling Agreement between the City of National City and EDCO Disposal Corporation provides for certain periodic rate adjustments. Annually, the rate adjusts on July 1st by the amount of the local consumer price index, with a maximum 6% cap. The contract also allows for a pass through of changes in disposal site fees. The County of San. Diego has indicated a very substantial 53.5% landfill increase. The disposal site fee would then total $43.00 per ton and the yard waste fee would be $25.00 per ton. Both are unofficially scheduled to be implemented on July 1, 1993. Attached is financial information and projections from our company's controller. All material has been reviewed by the independent auditing firm of Deloitte & Touche. The report recommends a 28% rate increase to residents and a 25% increase to businesses. The total proposed rate for a single family residence increases from $11.10 to $14.15 per month. The requested rate increase includes: - the increase in the County's tipping fee from $28.00 per ton to $43.00 per ton (increases rate by $1.91) - a reduction in the rate due to slightly improved markets for recyclables (decreases rate by $.09) - the cost of a full year's yard waste program (increases rate by $.61) - 5% franchise fee (increases rate by $.49) - the CPI adjustment (increases rate by only $.15) The extra City services provided in National City are included and represent $.91 of the proposed $14.15 rate. (See attachment) Printed on Recycled Paper The proposed senior citizen rate increases from $9.25 to $10.95 per month, which is only an 18% increase compared to the 28% increase for a single family residence. Please approve the attached rate schedule to be effective July 1, 1993. If the County of San Diego delays implementation or adopts a different fee, the schedule, of course, will be revised. Another issue presented for your consideration: The current Franchise Agreement expires in November, 1994. It would seem in our mutual best interest to extend the contract at this time. An extension, while first appearing to benefit the contractor, in reality favors the City as well. It allows for long term amortization of the extremely large investment we must make in order to hold the costs at the lowest possible level. Further, we must assist the City in compliance with the many State and County mandated programs and bear the tremendous capital costs associated with them. As you know, AB 939 requires 25% diversion by January 1, 1995. Many cities are adopting the automatic annual renewal type franchise. The Agreement generally starts for five years. Annually both parties have the option to cancel the contract. If notice is given, a five year phase out commences. If neither party provides notice, the term is extended for an additional year. This type of Agreement would allow the continuous and substantial investment necessary to provide the very best, uninterrupted integrated waste program to the City of National City. The company has completed plans and will soon start expansion of our Material Recovery Facility (MRF) in Lemon Grove. The new construction will allow for more efficient sorting and greater diversion of multi -family and commercial recyclables. As an added advantage, the City gets full use of the limited capacity of the only MRF in South County. The company has enlarged its fleet in order to handle the recently implemented Yard Waste Program. Additional trucks and containers will be acquired for the Multi -Family Programs and expansion of the Commercial Recycling Programs. Renewal of the franchise would continue the top quality service vital to your community by a proven, dedicated and committed contractor. Any concerns about costs are alleviated through examination of our firm's books and records by your independent auditing firm. Your approval of these proposals is requested. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, EDCO Disposal Corporation dba National City Rubbish ` 1K Zee--�'��l/Z� Edward Burr, President / DISPOSAL CORPORATION 6670 Federal Boulevard Lemon Grove. California 91945 (619) 287-7555 NATIONAL CITY RATE SCHEDULE JULY 1, 1993 RUBBISH AND GARBAGE 1. RESIDENTIAL Per month residential single family properties. For the second and for each additional residential unit in multiple dwellings which do not exceed four units 2. TRAILER PARRS AND MOTELS One time per week, per unit, per month 3. APARTMENT HOUSES One time per week, per unit per month 4. SENIOR -CITIZEN RESIDENTIAL Per month CURRENT PROPOSED MONTHLY MONTHLY RATE RATE 11.10 14.15 8.55 10.90 8.05 10.05 8.00 10.20 9.25 10.95 EXHIBIT "A" Printed on Recycled Paper ♦/ DES-F -OSAL. CORPORATION, 6670-Federal Boulevard Lemon GroveCalifornia 91945 (619) 287-7555- PROPOSED NATIONAL CITY RATE SCHEDULE JULY 1, 1993 CURRENT PROPOSED RUBBISH AND GARBAGE (COMMERCIAL MONTHLY MONTHLY AND INDUSTRIAL ESTABLISHMENTS) RATE RATE Up to (2) 40 gallon containers One time per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Two times per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Three times per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Four times per week, per month Up to (2) 40 gallon containers Daily (six days/Monday-Saturday) Additional or unusual accumulation of rubbish (per cubic yard) 13.35 21.25 27.30 33.75 44.10 8.00 16.65 26.50 33.90 42.10 55.05 10.00 Printed on Recycled Paper DISPOSAL CORPORATION bb70 eras aouievara Lemon Grove. California 91945 (619) 287-7555 PROPOSED NATIONAL CITY RATE SCHEDULE JULY 1, 1993 BOX TYPE REFUSE SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED NUMBER COLLECTION YARDS PER MONTHLY MONTHLY OF BINS FREQUENCY MONTH RATE RATE 1 1 13 70.60 88.10 1 2 26 113.65 141.85 1 3 39 156.60 195.45 1 4 52 199.65 249.20 1 5 65 242.70 302.90 1 6 78 285.60 356.45 1 7 91 353.60 441.30 2 1 26 143.45 179.00 2 2 52 226.40 282.60 2 3 78 310.95 388.10 2 4 104 399.25 498.30 2 5 130 462.70 577.50 2 6 156 526.85 657.60 2 7 182 618.90 772.45 3 1 39 151.25 188.80 3 2 78 332.10 414.50 3 3 117 454.35 567.10 3 4 156 527.25 658.10 3 5 195 681.60 850.70 3 6 234 820.40 1,023.95 3 7 273 1,012.15 1,263.25 4 1 52 256.60 320.25 4 2 104 418.10 521.85 4 3 156 580.10 724.00 4 4 208 679.30 847.85 4 5 260 877.00 1,094.60 4 6 312 987.95 1,233.05 4 7 364 1,301.25 1,624.10 Printed on Recycled Paper BOX TYPE REFUSE SERVICE CONT'D. CURRENT PROPOSED NUMBER COLLECTION YARDS PER MONTHLY MONTHLY OF BINS FREQUENCY MONTH RATE RATE 5 1 65 304.90 380.55 5 2 130 505.70 631.15 5 3 195 706.85 882.20 5 4 260 868.00 1,083.35 5 5 325 1,042.35 1,300.95 5 6 390 1,258.20 1,570.35 5 7 455 1,543.50 1,926.45 6 1 78 352.85 440.40 6 2 156 593.25 740.45 6 3 234 833.65 1,040.50 6 4 312 959.35 1,197.35 6 5 390 1,161.55 1,449.75 6 6 468 1,413.75 1,764.50 6 7 546 1,738.60 2,169.95 1TIONAL CITY - RATE REVIEW 1993 Effective July 1, 1993 % of Revenue Residential Commercial Current rate 11.10 70.80 C. P. I. 1.39% 0.15 0.96 Tip Fee Increase (assuming S43, eff. 7/1/93) 17.22% 1.91 12.18 Effect of Increasing Market Prices of Recyciablee (net) -0.79% -0.09 -0.58 Reverse Prior Vr. Annualization Adj. -0.87 Cost of Yard Waste Program 93-94 5.48% 0.61 Cost of Yard Waste Program 92-93 3.85 -1.22 Sub -total (including Current Franchise Fee) 13.68 85.12 Less: Current Franchise Fee (2%) 2.00% 0.22 1.41 Sub -total before Franchise Fee 5% Franchise Fee PROPOSED RATES C. P. I. ADJUSTMENT 13.48 83.71 0.71 4.41 27.86% 14.17 88.12 24.81% Revenues per Feb 28, '93 F/S 2,187,377 45,082 Franciae Fee Dump Cost per Feb 28, '93 F/S 698,939 742,021 Dump & Franchise Fee Percentage Dump to Revenue 31.86% 33.92% Applicable C. P. I. Rate 2.10% C. P. I. Rate reduced by dump % 1.43% 1.39% TIP FEE INCREASE ACTUAL - 9 MONTHS 'TONS TIP FEE RATE Jun-92 Jul-92 Aug-92 ep-92 Oct-92 Nov-92 Dec-92 Jen-93 Feb-93 3,111.44 71,803.48 $23 3,180.86 73,505.39 $23 2,961.85 88,247.18 $23 2,933.74 82,144.81 $28 2,926.86 81,952.18 $28 2,599.20 72,777.46 828 2,904.15 81,318.20 SY8 2,989.29 83,700.08 $28 2,915.86 81,844.01 328 28,522.85 897,090.55 Mar-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,938.43 82,220.13 Apr-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,938328 .43 82,220.13 328 May-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 82,220.13 $28 TIP FEE IN CURRENT RATE PROJECTED 8,809.30 248,680.40 35,332.15 943,750.95 2,355.05 11,775.24 85 37,887.20 955,526.19 1,013,974.00-58,447.81 TONS TIP FEE RATE Jun-93 3,111.44 87,120.32 Jul-93 $28 Aug-93 3,180.88 138,788.38 E43 9n9-93 2,981.85 127,350.95 $43 t-93 2,933.74 128,150.82 $43 ..�1/-93 2,928.86 125,854.98 $43 Dec-93 2,599.20 111,785.80 $43 Jan-94 2,904.15 124,878.45 S43 Feb-94 2,989.29 128,539.47 $43 2,915.88 125,381.98 $43 28, 522.85 1,093,810.95 Mar-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 126,266.83 Apr-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 6,268.83 $4343 May-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,938.43 128,268.83 $43 FREE SERVICE PROJECTED TIP FEE ACTUAL TIP FEE PROJECTED INCREASE PRIOR YEAR OVERAGE 8,809.30 378,799.90 35, 332.15 1, 472, 810.85 2,355.05 47,100.95 $20 37,687.20 1, 519, 711.80 1,519,711.80 955,528.19 584,185.61 -58,447.81 505, 737.80 ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS 2,187,377.00 PROJ. REVENUE - 3 MONTHS 750, 000.00 2,937,377.00 PERCENTAGE INCREASE 17.22% -58,447.81 crrct.I fur nvn:neAbINU MARKE1 PRICES OF RECYCLABLES Forecasted Revenues from Sgles of Reoyclables Forecasted Tons Recycled Forecasted Average Revenues per Ton ACTUAL - 9 MONTHS 18,562.11 ORIGINAL 782.65 0=7300•.1 10 CENTS 21.16 18,562.11 REVISED TONS REVENUES AVG / TON Jun-92 78.33 1,429.15 Jul-9218.72 Aug-92 69.97 2,035.90 Y9.10 Sap•92 74.33 1,754.48 23.60 Oct-92 79.80 1,780.59 22.31 71.53 1,475.60 20.63 Nov-92 Dec -92 -973.04 1,593.75 21.82 Jan-93 85.25 2,204.53 25.86 Feb-93 73.08 1,899.52 25.99 87.83 1,643.82 24.31 670.98 15,817.34 23.57 Mar-93 (PROJECTED) 70.56 1,791.52 25.39 Apr-93 (PROJECTED) 75.43 1,963.44 May-93 (PROJECTED) 2 66.86 1,573.22 23..53 3 212.85 5,328.18 ACTUAL + 3 MO. PROJ. REVENUES 883.81 ANNUALIZED OVERAGE 9 MONTH OVERAGE ACTUAL REVENUE • 9 MONTHS OVERRECOVERED REVENUES FROM SALES OF RECYCLABLE& 23.93 21,145.52 4,583.41 3,428.50 2,187,377.00 -0.16% 74.80% 74.80% PROJECTED TONS PROJECTED REVENUE PER 1`ON BASED ON 1/93 & 2/93 883.81 25.15 PREVIOUS ANNUAL PROJECTED REVENUE PROJECTED ADDITIONAL OVERAGE ADJUST TO 9 MONTHS (9/12) ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS SUB -TOTAL LESS: REVERSAL OF PRIOR YEAR'S UNRECOVERED REVENUES t!k COST OF YARD WASTE PROGRAM RUBBISH COLLECTION ONLY 1 2 RUBBISH AND YARD WASTE 1 ADDITIONAL COLLECTION LESS: TIP FEE SAVINGS EST. 7,300 HOMES AT 15 - 3 AXLE TRUCK W/ 2 MEN - - 2 AXLE TRUCKS W/ 1 MAN 2- 1- 3 AXLE TRUCK W/ 2 MEN - 2 AXLE TRUCKS WI 1 MAN 2 AXLE TRUCK W/ 1 MAN - COST RELATED TO YARD WASTE 22,227.12 16,502.11 5,865.01 4,248.78 2,187,377.00 ti 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS - 5 • 8 HOUR DAYS 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 5 - 9 HOUR DAYS POUNDS PER HOME PER WEEK TIMES 4.33 WEEKS PER MONTH LANDFILL TRASH FEE LANDFILL YARD WASTE FEE NET COST OF YARD WASTE PROGRAM PER MONTH MULTIPLY BY 9 MONTHS ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS -0.19% -0.35% -0.44% -0.79% HOURLY RATE $125 21,850 $90 31,178 $125 090 $90 $43 $25 21,650 31,176 17,537 52,826 70,383 17,637 237 $18 4,267 13,289 119,424 2,187,377 6.48% 1 EILSPOSkeiLCORPORATION 6670 Federal Eoulevar Lemon Grove' Caiifornia 91945(619) 28T7 NATIONAL CITY COST OF CITY SERVICE Residential 30% 7300 Residential Accounts Commercial 70% 14000 Bins Per Month 3230 Bins Per Week 60 Street Litter Cans Serviced 2 x week 19-3 Cubic Yard Bins at various City Parks and buildings 1 - 2 x week 2 Major Clean-ups Per Year (Estimated at $6,000 per day) 360 ROB Loads Per Year to Service Sweeping Debris, etc.. at Public Works Yard Bulky Items Pick-up 1 x week ($600 per week - Residential only) Refrigerator Door Program (1 day per month @ $40 per hour) Sub Total $253,000 Divided by $.95 for Franchise Fee Residential 30% ($266,000) $79,800 Divided by 7,300 Divided by 12 Commercial 70% ($266,000) $186,200 Divided by 3,230 Divided by 12 Annually Annually ANNUAL COST $ 9,000 $ 35,000 $ 12,000 $ 162,000 $ 31,000 $ 4,000 $ 253,000 $ 266,000 $.91 Per Mo $4.80 Per Mo Per Bin Pnnfed on Recycled Paper REF# CITY RESIDENTIAL RATE COMPARISON MAY 1993 RES RATE RECY RESDL FRNCH AB939 TOTAL FEE OTHER 1) 2+ 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) 1F FALLBROOK VALLEY CENTER SPRING VALLEY ENCINITAS ESCONDIDO POWAY OCEANSIDE LA MESA IMPERIAL BEACH DEL MAR CARLSBAD SOLANA BEACH LEMON GROVE VISTA CHULA VISTA EL CAJON SAN MARCOS NATIONAL CITY 16.65 2.30 16.05 1.50 16.79 INCLUDED PROPOSED 14.75 13.44 11.38 11.52 10.91 1.50 1.59 1.82 9.50 1.29 11.40 1.10 12.45 INCLUDED 10.68 1.60 10.20 1.48 9.85 1.26 10.32 0.78 3.74 0.52 1.84 18.95 18.80 17.55 16.79 7.5% 16.46 10% CITY BILLS 14.75 13.44 CITY BILLS 13.40 4% 13.11 CITY BILLS 12.73 5% CITY BILLS 12.67 4.6% CITY BILLS/ADJ TO LANDFILL 12.63 12.50 6.5% 12.45 5% 12.28 8% 11.68 3% ADJACENT TO LANDFILL 11.11 5% ADJACENT TO LANDFILL 11.10 2% COMMERICAL RATE COMPARISON MAY 1993 FRNCH 3 C YRD REF# CITY FEE 1 X WK OTHER 1) VALLEY CENTER 79.00 2,1 CARLSBAD 4.6% 76.86 CITY BILLS/ADJ TO LANDFILL 30 DEL MAR 5% 76.81 CITY BILLS 4) SOLANA BEACH 76.81 5) NATIONAL CITY 2% 70.60 6) LEMON GROVE 6.5% 69.95 7) POWAY 69.75 8) ENCINITAS 7.5% 69.33 9) FALLBROOK 69.25 10) VISTA 5% 66.33 11) SAN MARCOS 5% 64.71 ADJACENT TO LANDFILL 12) ESCONDIDO 10% 63.95 CITY BILLS 13) CHULA VISTA 8% 63.89 14) LA MESA 4% 63.73 15) EL CAJON 3% 63.25 ADJACENT TO LANDFILL 16) OCEANSIDE 62.04 CITY BILLS 17) SPRING VALLEY 61.05 181 IMPERIAL BEACH 55.44 CITY BILLS Deloitte & Touche May 5, 1993 Mr. C. R. Williams, Jr. Public Works Department City of National City 2100 Hoover Avenue National City, California 91950-6599 Dear Mr. Williams: Suite 1900 Telephone: (619) 232-6500 701 "B" Street - -- ITT Telex: 4995722 San Diego, California 92101-8198 Facsimile: (619) 237-1755 We have applied certain agreed -upon procedures, as discussed below, to accounting records and other items as related to EDCO Disposal Corporation ("EDCO") and San Diego Recycling ("Recycling"), as requested by you to assist you in evaluating your contractual relationship with EDCO and Recycling. It is understood that this report is intended for use of the City Council of National City and the management of EDCO and Recycling. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. The procedures we performed, which relate primarily to your fiscal year 1994 residential refuse rate, are summarized as follows: 1. We read EDCO's internally prepared financial statements for the nine months ended February 28, 1993, and the audited financial statements for the year ended May 31, 1992. We inquired of Alder, Green & Hasson (independent certified public accountants for EDCO) and Dan Gallaher (Controller for EDCO), as to any changes in accounting policies and methods of application which might affect the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate for the City. 2. We reviewed the recalculation of the fiscal 1993 residential refuse rate, which has been used as a basis for the fiscal 1994 rate adjustment. 3. We obtained and reviewed information which supports the Consumer Price Index adjustment as calculated by EDCO. 4. We reviewed EDCO's calculation of franchise fees due to the City for the period from May 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993, to ascertain that they were calculated based on revenues as reported in EDCO's underlying financial records and that they were in accordance with contractual requirements. DeloitteTouche Tohmatsu International 5. We reviewed franchise fee remittances made to National City by EDCO for the period from May 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993 to ascertain that they were made on a timely basis. 6. We reviewed San Diego County landfill fee increases projected during the fiscal year 1993 rate review process, and agreed actual increases to supporting documentation. We agreed actual tipping charges and tons of waste to supporting documentation for five judgementally selected days for the period from June 1992 to February 1993. 7. We reviewed the reasonableness of projected fiscal 1994 San Diego County landfill fee increases on the rate calculation. 8. We ascertained that one-time adjustments to the fiscal 1993 rate review were properly excluded from the fiscal 1994 rate review. 9. We reviewed the calculation of actual vs. projected revenues from the sale of recyclables related to the fiscal 1993 rate, and the corresponding adjustment to the 1994 rate, for reasonableness. 10. We agreed total tons of recyclable materials sold to underlying accounting records and related supporting work tickets for two judgementally selected months. 11. We compared the estimated price per ton of recyclables used for calculating the projected fiscal year 1994 rates with documentation which supports actual prices currently in force for two judgementally selected dates. 12. We reviewed the calculation of the cost of the green waste service program, including landfill diversion, and through discussion with Dan Gallaher compared it to a program in place for another municipality serviced by EDCO. 13. We reviewed the calculation of the franchise fee and the effect of its increase to 5% on the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate calculation. 14. We performed a review of insurance in force, through discussion with Mike Fellows of EDCO, to ascertain that coverage levels were in compliance with contractual requirements. In connection with the procedures referred to above, no matters came to our attention that caused us to believe that the specified accounts or the final calculation of items noted above, as they relate to the fiscal 1994 rate calculation prepared for the City by EDCO (attached as Exhibit A) should be adjusted. Because the above procedures do not constitute an audit made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, we do not express an opinion on any of the accounts or items referred to above. Had we performed additional procedures or had we made an audit of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report related only to the accounts and items specified above and does not extend to any financial statements of EDCO, taken as a whole. Very truly yours, 0;44:40 f; 7-144-Z Attachment E -IIBIT A NATIONAL CITY - RATE REVIEW 1993 Effective July 1, 1993 % of Revenue Residential Commercial Current rate 11.10 70.80 C. P. I. 1.39% 0.15 0.98 Tip Fee Increase (assuming $43, eff. 7/1/93) 17.22% 1.91 12.18 Effect of Increasing Market Prices of Recyclables (net) -0.79% -0.09 -0.58 Reverse Prior Yr. Annualization Adj. -0.67 Cost of Yard Waste Program 93-94 5.46% 0.61 3.85 Cost of Yard Waste Program 92-93 -1.22 Sub -total (including Current Franchise Fee) 13.68 85.12 Less: Current Franchise Fee (2%) 2.00% Sub -total before Franchise Fee 5% Franchise Fee 0.22 1.41 13.46 83.71 0.71 4.41 PROPOSED RATES 27.66% 14.17 VAC C. P. 1. ADJUSTMENT Revenues per Feb 28, '93 F/S Dump Cost per Feb 28, '93 F/S 88.12 24.8196 2,187,377 45,082 Francise Fee 696,939 742,021 Dump & Franchise Fee Percentage Dump to Revenue 31.86% Applicable C. P. I. Rate 2.10% C. P. 1. Rate reduced by dump % 1.43% 33.92% 1.39% i:: TIP FEE INCREASE ACTUAL - 9 MONTHS TONS TIP FEE RATE Jun-92 3,111.44 71,803.48 $23 JuI-92 3,180.66 73,505.39 $23 Aug-92 2,981.65 68,247.16 $23 Sep-92 2,933.74 82,144.61 $28 Oct-92 2,926.86 81,952.16 $28 Nov-92 2,599.20 72,777.46 $28 Dec-92 2,904.15 81,318.20 $28 Jan-93 2,989.29 83,700.08 $28 Feb-93 2,915.86 81,644.01 $28 26,522.85 697,090.55 Mar-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,938.43 82,220.13 $28 Apr-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,938.43 82,220.13 $28 May-93 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 82,220.13 $28 TIP FEE IN CURRENT RATE PROJECTED 8,809.30 248,660.40 35,332.15 943,750.95 2,355.05 11,775.24 $5 37,687.20 955,526.19 1,013,974.00 -58,447.81 TONS TIP FEE RATE Jun-93 3,111.44 87,120.32 $28 Jul-93 3,180.66 136,788.38 $43 Aug-93 2,961.85 127,350.95 $43 Sep-93 2,933.74 126,150.82 $43 Oct-93 2,926.86 125,854.98 $43 Nov-93 2,599.20 111,765.60 $43 Dec-93 2,904.15 124,878.45 $43 Jan-94 2,989.29 128,539.47 843 Feb-94 2,915.86 125,381.98 $43 26,522.85 1,093,810.95 Mer-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 126,286.63 $43 Apr-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 126,266.63 $43 May-94 (PROJ.) based on 12/92 - 2/93 avg. 2,936.43 126,266.63 $43 FREE SERVICE PROJECTED TIP FEE ACTUAL TIP FEE 8,809.30 378,799.90 35,332.15 1,472,610.85 2,355.05 47,100.95 37,687.20 1, 519, 711.80 1,519,711.80 955,526.19 $20 PROJECTED INCREASE 564,185.61 PRIOR YEAR OVERAGE -58,447.81 -58,447.81 505,737.80 ACTUAL. REVENUE - 9 MONTHS 2,187,377.00 PROJ. REVENUE - 3 MONTHS 750,000.00 2,937,377.00 PERCENTAGE INCREASE 17.22% EFL OF INCREASING MARKET PRICES OF RECYCLABLES Forecasted Revenues from Sales of Recyclebles Forecasted Tons Recycled Forecasted Average Revenues per Ton ACTUAL - 9 MONTHS ' 782.65 21.16 TONS REVENUES AVG/TON Jun-92 76.33 1,429.15 18.72 JuI-92 69.97 2,035.90 29.10 Aug-92 74.33 1,754.48 23.60 Sep-92 79.80 1,780.59 22.31 Oct-92 71.53 1,475.60 20.63 Nov-92 73.04 1,593.75 21.82 Dec-92 85.25 2,204.53 25.86 Jan-93 73.08 1,899.52 25.99 Feb-93 67.63 1,643.82 24.31 Mar-93 (PROJECTED) Apr-93 (PROJECTED) May-93 (PROJECTED) 670.96 15,817.34 23.57 70.56 1,791.52 25.39 75.43 1,963.44 26.03 66.86 1,573.22 23.53 212.85 5,328.18 ACTUAL + 3 MO. PROJ. REVENUES 883.81 ANNUALIZED OVERAGE 9 MONTH OVERAGE ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS OVERRECOVERED REVENUES FROM SALES OF RECYCLABLES 23.93 16,562.11 ORIGINAL 0 16,562.11 REVISED 21,145.52 4,583.41 3,428.50 2,187,377.00 -0.16% 74.80% 74.80% CUR. _ _.1T YEAR REVENUES FROM SALES OF RECYCLABLES PROJECTED TONS 883.81 PROJECTED REVENUE PER TON BASED ON 1/93 & 2/93 25.15 22,227.12 PREVIOUS ANNUAL PROJECTED REVENUE 16,562.11 PROJECTED ADDITIONAL OVERAGE ADJUST TO 9 MONTHS (9/12) ACTUAL REVENUE - 9 MONTHS SUB -TOTAL LESS: REVERSAL OF PRIOR YEAR'S UNRECOVERED REVENUES COST OF YARD WASTE PROGRAM 5,665.01 4,248.76 2,187,377.00 -0.19% -0.35% -0.44% -0.79% RUBBISH COLLECTION ONLY 1 - 3 AXLE TRUCK W/ 2 MEN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 2 - 2 AXLE TRUCKS W/ 1 MAN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS RUBBISH AND YARD WASTE 1 - 3 AXLE TRUCK W/ 2 MEN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 2 - 2 AXLE TRUCKS W/ 1 MAN - 5 - 8 HOUR DAYS 1 - 2 AXLE TRUCK W/ 1 MAN - 5 - 9 HOUR DAYS ADDITIONAL COLLECTION COST RELATED TO YARD WASTE HOURLY RATE 3125 21,650 390 31,176 3125 21,650 390 31,176 $90 17,537 52,826 70,363 17,537 LESS: TIP FEE SAVINGS EST. 7,300 HOMES AT 15 POUNDS PER HOME PER WEEK TIMES 4.33 WEEKS PER MONTH 237 LANDFILL TRASH FEE 343 LANDFILL YARD WASTE FEE 325 318 NET COST OF YARD WASTE PROGRAM PER MONTH MULTIPLY BY 9 MONTHS ACTUAL REVENUE-9 MONTHS 4,267 13,269 119,424 2,187,377 5.46% Deloitte & Touche Suite 1900 Telephone: (619) 232-6500 701 "B" Street ITT Telex: 4995722 San Diego, California 92101-8198 Facsimile: (619) 237-1755 April 27, 1993 Mr. C. R. Williams, Jr. Public Works Department City of National City 2100 Hoover Avenue National City, California 91950-6599 Dear Mr. Williams: This letter will confirm our understanding of the terms and objectives of our engagement and the nature and limitations of the services we will provide in assisting you in evaluating your contractual relationship with EDCO Disposal Corporation ("EDCO") and San Diego Recycling ("Recycling"). Our procedures to be performed, which relate primarily to your fiscal year 1994 residential refuse rate, will consist of the following items: 1. Review EDCO's internally prepared financial statements for the nine months ended February 28, 1993, and the audited financial statements for the year ended May 31, 1992. Inquire of Alder, Green & Hasson (independent certified public accountants for EDCO) and Dan Gallaher (Controller for EDCO), as to any changes in accounting policies and methods of application which might affect the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate for National City. 2. Review the recalculation of the fiscal 1993 residential refuse rate, which is used as a basis for the fiscal 1994 rate adjustment. 3. Obtain and review information which supports the Consumer Price Index adjustment as calculated by EDCO. 4. Review EDCO's calculation of franchise fees due to National City for the period from May 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993, to ascertain that they have been calculated based on revenues as reported in EDCO's underlying financial records and that they are in accordance with contractual requirements. 5. Review franchise fee remittances made to National City by EDCO for the period from May 1, 1992 to March 31, 1993 to ascertain that they were made on a timely basis. DeloitteTouche Tohmatsu International 6. Review San Diego County landfill fee increases projected during the fiscal year 1993 rate review process, if any. Agree actual increases to supporting documentation. 7. Review reasonableness of projected fiscal 1994 San Diego County landfill fee increases, if any, on the rate calculation. 8. Ascertain that one-time adjustments to the fiscal 1993 rate review have been properly excluded from the fiscal 1994 rate review. 9. Review the calculation of under- or over -recorded revenues from the sale of recyclables. 10. Agree total tons of recyclable materials sold to underlying accounting records, as appropriate. From the underlying accounting records, judgmentally select daily recyclable totals and agree those totals to supporting work tickets. 11. Compare the estimated price per ton of recyclables used for calculating the projected fiscal year 1994 rates, with documentation which supports actual prices currently in force. 12. Review the calculation of the green waste service program, including landfill diversion as appropriate, and compare to other similar programs, if any, in other municipalities serviced by EDCO. 13. Review the calculation of the franchise fee and the effect of its change, if any, on the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate calculation. 14. Review insurance in force to ascertain that coverage levels comply with contractual requirements. As a result of our findings, you may determine that additional tests or calculations may be required to provide the necessary information. Additional work, if necessary, would concentrate on specific computations or verification of expenses, revenues, allocations or other relevant financial information. Prior to the commencement of any additional procedures, a definition of requirements and additional costs would be prepared and your approval would be required. Our procedures are primarily directed toward a review of the fiscal year 1994 refuse rate adjustment for services provided by EDCO and Recycling. They do not consider the quality of such services provided. However, should anything come to our attention during the course of our work that would indicate outstanding or poor quality service, we would also report these findings. Our report will summarize the procedures we performed and the results of these procedures. However, because the procedures performed by us will not be sufficient to constitute an audit made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, we will not express an opinion on the financial records of EDCO or Recycling or on the items discussed above. If we were to perform additional procedures or if we were to conduct an audit of the financial statements of EDCO or Recycling in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, other matters might come to our attention that would be reported to you. It is understood that the report will be solely for your information and is not to be referred to or distributed for any purpose to anyone who is not member of the management of the City of National City, EDCO or Recycling. It is understood that the report may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the California Public Records Act. An estimate of our proposed fee to perform these procedures is listed in Attachment A. We anticipate that our work will commence the final week of April 1993 and, in order to meet your deadlines, will be completed by the second full week of May 1993. Our invoices are payable when presented. We will notify you immediately of any circumstances we encounter which would significantly affect our estimate. By signing this letter in the spaces provided below, EDCO and National City authorize the commencement of our work, and agree that the procedures described above meet the needs of the parties to the contract. It is agreed that all fees shall be paid by EDCO. This proposed engagement letter has been issued in advance of completion of our usual new client review procedures. Accordingly, our acceptance of this engagement is subject to satisfactory resolution of this matter. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to EDCO Disposal Corporation and to the City of National City. Very truly yours, Accepted by National City: By: Date: • Q..&14/1/4 C. R. W. lams, Jr., Public Works Direct 4/zg/93 Accepted by EDCO: By: Date: Edward Burr, President ATTACHMENT A Proposed fees to perform agreed upon procedures: Partner 2 hours at $275/hr $ 550 Concurring Reviewer .5 hours at $320/hr 160 Senior Manager 28 hours at $210/hr 5.880 6,590 Typing 4 hours at $35/hr 140 Overhead 2% of cost 135 25% Discount 6,865 (1.716) $ 5,149 Additional work requested by the City, if any, will be billed in addition to the fees quoted above. PACIFIC DISPOSAL, INC. 1991/2 Mace Street Chula Vista, CA 92011 (619) 221-8060 Fax: (619) 476-0768 June 8, 1993 Mayor George Waters City of National City 1243 National City Blvd. National City, ca. 91950 Dear Mayor Waters; We have a list of part of the data EDCO has submitted to the City in regards to the requested rate increase that we feel need to be looked into in a more detailed fashion. CURRENT MONTHLY FEE 1. RES. RATE 2. TIPPING FEE BREAK DOWN PROPOSED RATE 11.10 14.15 1.91 (.91) ? CITY SERVICE'S 3. IMPROVED MARKETS (.09) 4. YARD WASTE PROGRAM .61 5. FRANCHISE FEE .49 6. C.P.I. ADJUSTMENT .15 (.49)? FRANCHISE FEE + 3.07 = 14.17(.02) These are the concerns we have found in just the residential rate at this time. It also appears EDCO has passed the FREE CITY SERVICE and FRANCHISE FEE onto the commercial rate, to which he is not entitled to. We have commissioned a C.P.A firm to review the many discrepancies that we as laymen have found in the new rate schedule. We feel the best avenue for the council to take at this time would be to send this matter back to staff for a more in depth study of the TRUE BASE COST PER UNIT AND LANDFILL COST'S PER UNIT and not rely on the contractor's own cost study. We would be glad to share with you and staff the results of the independent study we are having prepared at the present time. rJOFLG HOLLZa1ND,PRESIDENT PACI C DISPOSAL, INC. LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS June 7, 1993 The Honorable Mayor George H. Waters City of National City 1243 National City Blvd. National City, CA 92050-4397 Honorable Mayor, Trash Franchise I understand that Edco Disposal Corporation has proposed a modification to the terms of their National City Trash Franchise, including an extension of the term for an additional five years. These requests are scheduled for consideration by the Council at their regular meetings in June, 1993. Laidlaw Waste Systems Inc., is the third largest hauler in North America and provides waste collection and recycling services to Chula Vista and Imperial Beach under contract to these cities. While we have honored, and will continue to honor Edco's franchise in National City, we strongly believe that at the end of the franchise term, it is in the City's best interest to invite competitive proposals from qualified waste haulers. Laidlaw is well qualified to provide such services in National City and we respectfully request that at the end of the current franchise term, City Council request proposals from Laidlaw and other qualified haulers. I will be pleased!}to answer any questions that you or the Council members have, or to provide any additional information on T L.41UIGfi. Sincerely, Alan J. es Marke Strategic Development Manager cc: National City Council Members (4) City Manager City Attorney City Clerk Recycled Paper 180 Otay Lakes Road, Suite 200 • Bonita, California 91902 • (619) 267 - 6900 BP G1l1ES SEGA92170RVICE laS HONE 0 9) 4777 2200 PAX (619) 477-17SS June 8, 1993 Mayor George H. Waters Members of the City Council City of National City 1243 National City Blvd. National City, CA. 91950 RE: Agenda Item No. 2 Public Hearing - Rate Increase for Trash Disposal Agenda Item No. 7 Dear Mayor Waters: I am writing to you and each member of The City Council regarding the above two Agenda Items. We were unable to obtain copies until after 1:00 P.M. Monday for review of the issues. Therefore we could not prepare this memo until this morning. RATE INCREASE Everyone is aware of the dilemma the County of San Diego is facing related to the current and future disposal of Solid Waste. Flow control of the waste stream required for Bonding is still in a state of flux so future capital projects are in jeopardy and the future of the San Marcos Landfill is anybody's guess. However there is one certain fact LANDFILL FEES HAVE INCREASED 54% from $28.00 per ton to $43.00 per ton! This is an operating expense that every waste hauler cannot absorb and must pass through as part of the service rate to his customers. THE PROPOSAL I have reviewed the entire proposal made by the current Franchise Hauler. On page two of the proposal, paragraphs two and three the contractor is requesting a FIVE YEAR EXTENSTION to the existing contract which expires November 17, 1994. Further, annually, if either party wishes to cancel then a five year phase out commences! I personally attended previous City Council meeting in July and August of 1990 that dealt with a request for Rate Increases and a ten year Extension of the Contract. The Council sent a clear signal during several sessions by only approving modified rate increases, a compromise on the Franchise Fee and granted only a FOUR YEAR extension so the contract would go out for bid in the future. With all of the uncertainty within the County of San Diego at this time, Bay Cities respectfully requests that the City Council does not grant an extention of the current contract for the collection and disposal of solid waste services in National City. Place a REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL for thiese services in the open market and let the competitive bidding process produce the best Contract for all of the residents of National City. Sincerely, BAY CITIES SERVICES, INC. A. J. Moore Jr. General Manager AJM/nk cc: Stephen Cavadias, President Mike Dalla Ralph Inzunza Ron Morrison Rosalie Zarate City of National City, California COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT MEETING DATE May 25, 1993 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 ITEM TITLE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY. WITH EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION PREPARED BY George H. Eiser, III EXPLANATION Companion items on the Agenda pertain to the City entering into an agreement with the County of San Diego, whereby the City agrees to commit 50-100% of its solid waste to disposal in County landfills. City staff recommends that the City commit the full 100%. Under the current exclusive contract with Edco Disposal Corporation, the City's garbage and rubbish hauling contractor, waste material pertaining to building operations" (i.e., construction debris) is not included in the definition of "rubbish," which is to be collected by the contractor. In order to meet its contractual obligations with the County, the City must ensure that construction debris is deposited in County landfills. The proposed amendment would include construction debris among the materials to be collected by the City's contract hauler, thus enabling the City to satisfy its obligations. The amendment also provides that existing contracts for collection and disposal of construction debris would not be affected; this is to avoid problems regarding interference with existing contractual rights of other solid waste haulers operating in the City. A separate Agenda item addresses this issue as it relates to the ordinance authorizing an exclusive garbage and rubbish hauling contract. DEPARTMENT City Attorney Environmental Review Financial Statement N/A X N/A Account No. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION N/A ATTACHMENTS (Listed Below) Proposed Resolution Proposed Amendment Resolution No. 93-63 A-200 (Rev. 9/80) cvo � 4-TO RESOLUTION NO. 93-63 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN CITY OF NATIONAL CITY WITH EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATIO WHEREAS, on September 25, 1990, the ty of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation entered into an agreement entitl- a "Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by anbetween the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rend-- ed;" and WHEREAS, the City and Edco .w desire to amend various provisions of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE of National City that the Mayor is her agreement with Edco Disposal Co "Agreement for Collection of Rub between the City of National Rendered." Said Amendment t PASSED and ATTEST: Lori Anne P oples, City Clerk APPRO D AS TO FORM: Ge rge H. Eiser, III C'ty Attorney RESOLVED by the City Council of the City y authorized to execute an Amendment to the ation, dated September 25, 1990, and entitled ish and Trash in the City of National City by and ity and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Agreement is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. OPTED this 25th day of May, 1993. George H. Waters, Mayor AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION OF RUBBISH AND TRASH IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY This Amendment to Agreement is made and entered into this 25th day of May, 1993, by and between the City of National City, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and Edco Disposal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." RECITALS A. On September 25, 1990, CITY and CONTRACTOR entered into an agreement entitled "Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered." B. of said agreement. NOW following provision of National City by for Services Rende 1. follows: 95 a0 a amend various provisions Itually agree to amend the bbish and Trash in the City 1 Edco Disposal Corporation iereby amended to read as reement to provide for the exclusi transport, recycle and dispose of garbage, u�. __ jai from single-family residential, multi -family, commercial, industrial and from City -occupied facilities in accordance with this agreement„ the ordinances of the City of National City, the regulations established by the County of San Diego and all applicable State and Federal Laws. 1 2. Section 2(B) is amended to read as follows: B. "RUBBISH" is refuse and waste material, whether combustible or noncombustible, not included within the definition of garbage as herein defined, including but not limited to paper, rags, glass, ashes and yard waste (leaves, grass, tree and vine trimmings). It shall not include automobile frames or fenders, hazardous or toxic materials, nor dead animals. 3. Section 7 is amended to read as follows: DUMP SITE: Contractor shall use disposal sites designated by CITY. In this regard, Contractor shall pay whatever reasonable use fees are charged for such a designated disposal site, and said fees shall be an operating expense for purposes of setting rates hereunder. In any event, Contractor will not burn any combustible substances within the City of National City. All disposal activities of Contractor shall be conducted in such a way as to enhance, and not impair, the health, welfare, sanitation and safety of the people of the City of National City. 4. Section 17 is amended to read as follows: EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT: City hereby grants to Contrac- tor, during the term of this agreement, the exclusive right to collect all rubbish and garbage and recyclable material within the City of National City, as it now, or in the future, exists. City will not grant, during the term of this agreement, any other person the right to collect any rubbish or garbage or recyclable material for compensation within its city limits. Nothing herein is intended to prevent customary agreements to service commercial/industrial facilities for recyclable material from roll -off containers nor to prevent individuals from recycling their own material nor charitable organizations from recycling donated materials. 5. This Amendment shall operate prospectively and shall not affect any contract, existing as of the date of this Amendment, for the collection, conveyance, transport and disposal of waste material pertaining to building operations. 2 6. Except as otherwise provided herein, all of the provisions of the Agreement for Collection of Rubbish and Trash in the City of National City by and between the City of National City and Edco Disposal Corporation for Services Rendered, dated September 25, 1990, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands on the date first above stated. APPROVED AS TO FORM: 7Z George H. Eiser, III City Attorney 3 George H. Waters, Mayor EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION By: By: May 24, 1993 Mayor George H. Waters Members of the City Council City of National City 1243 National City Blvd. National City, CA. 91950 RE: Agenda Item No. 4 Resolution 93-63 Agenda Item No. 7 Urgency Ordinance gp 4 Clt\ES SE2y10E?\E`Ep /1 creeR 2 70 aV iz #VD2 3u2,ti ,t6S' Dear Mayor Waters; I am writing to you regarding the above two Ordinances on the Consent Calendar for the regular meeting Tuesday, May 25, 1993. We were not aware the aho=e Agenda Items were to be on THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR TOMORROW'S MEETING. Bay Cities Services, Inc. is gravely concerned regarding the magnitude and ramifications of these two Agenda Items. RESOLUTION NO. 93-64 Committing 100% of National City's waste stream under the Flow Control Covenant with the County of San Diego is a seperate issue. We are fully aware of the County's dilemma. These areas are vital to support the financial integrity of the County Waste Management Department. 1. APPROVAL OF THE EXPANSION OF THE SAN MARCOS LANDFILL BY ALL STATE AGENCIES. 2. A TOTAT.TY COMMITTED AND CONTROLLED WASTE STREAM. 3. TIPPING FEES TO BE INCREASED 89Z OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS OR LESS. We urge that you and the members of THE CITY COUNCIL commit only 50% of the waste stream, now. In a short five months the entire picture could change. Approval to expand the SAN MARCOS LANDFILL MAY NOT BE APPROVED. Rest assured tipping fee's will go up more dramatically than the announced increase of 54%, from $28.00 per ton to $43.00 per ton in order to insure all technical details of closure. This expenditure is estimated to cost more than SIXTY TO EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS. AGhNDA ITEM NO 4 Bay Cities does not feel it is necessary to amend the current Franchise Agreement to include exclusive rights for the collection and hauling of construction debris in Roll -Off Containers in order to guarantee ENFORCEMENT OF FLOW CONTROL. We believe this is clearly stated in the INTERIM AGREEMENT page 3, Article 3.4 as approved by the the STEERING COMMITTEE on May 11, 1993. The Mayor and City Council in their wisdom, (CHOSE NOT) to include the collection and hauling of construction debris in Roll -Off Containers in the revisions to THE FRANCHISE - Section 17, Exclusive Contract page 10 and page 11 in July of 1990, Agenda Item No. 9. Why:; to assure some level of competitive pricing for the collection and removal of construction debris related to planned solid growth and expansion for the City's future. 4 SSEoc tE,, A0 gpV G1i\E AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 URGENCY ORDINANCE This companion Agenda Item indicates an Urgency Ordinance is required to ammend the existing Franchise in order to meet the City's contractural obligations, incorporating construction debris "in the definition of rubbish." Bay Cities feels this is not necessary at this time. Responsible haulers have been and I am sure will continue to provide licensed Contractors working in National City, competitive rates for collection and removal of construction debris in ROLL -OFF CONTAINERS and to be cost effective the hauler would use a County Landfill. I am sure your Waste Audit indicates a maximum of 5 - 8% of the generated Waste Stream represents construction debris. These are weighty matters that warrant additional review and discussions before final decisions on all the issues are made. As a member of the National City Business Community we are very concerned regarding the overall impact of the two Agenda Items and Resolutions on our existing business and future opportunities in our City. Bay Cities respectfully requests that Agenda Item No. 4 and Agenda Item No. 7 be pulled from the Agenda for the regular City Council Meeting Tuesday, May 25, 1993 and carried over to the next regularly scheduled Council Meeting. Sincerely, BAY CITIES SERVICES, INC. �d1 f A. J. Moore Jr. General Manager AJM/nk PACIFIC DISPOSAL, INC, 1991/2 Mace Street Chula Vista, CA 92011 (619) 221-8060 Fax: (619) 476-0768 MAYOR GEORGE WATERS CRY OF NATIONAL CTiY DEAR MAYOR WATERS MAY 25, 1993 R HAS COME TO OUR AT1INTION THAT THE CRY INTENDS TO GRANT TO EDCO DISPOSAL THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO SERVICE BOTH HOMEOWNERS AND CONTRACTORS WITH ROLL -OFF SERVICE IN YOUR CRY. 1 FOR ONE FIND THIS TYPE OF ACTION UNFAIR TO NOT ONLY MYSELF AS A BUSINESSMAN IN THE WASTE DISPOSAL BUSINESS BUT TO CONTRACTORS AND RESIDENCES WE CURRENTLY SERVICE AS WELL WE ARE A SMALL COMPANY THAT PRIDE OURSELF IN GIVING OUR CUSTOMERS, BE R HOMEOWNERS,CONTRACTORS OR BUILDERS GOOD SERVICE AT A FAIR PRICE. WE HAVE PROVIDED SERVICE IN YOUR CITY FOR 5 YEARS AND HAVE NOT HAD ONE COMPLAINT BY A CUSTOMER OR CITY AGENCY. WE HAVE PROVIDED AT NO CHARGE, ROLL -OFF CONTAINERS 70 THE CHRISTMAS IN JULY PROGRAM,THE BOYS CLUB OF NATIONAL CITY, THE NATIONAL CRY LIONS CLUB AND THE IOWANIS CLUB. WE ALSO OFFER DISCOUNTS TO SENIOR CITIZENS AND ALL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. THIS NEW ORDINANCE WILL ELIMINATE CUSTOMERS FROM SHOPPING AROUND TO GET THE SERVICE THEY DEMAND AND WILL ALSO STOP ANY NEGOTIATIONS AS FAR AS PRICE IS CONCERNED. THE BOTTOM UNE IS THAT IN THESE TROUBLED ECONOMIC TIMES WE NEED TO NOT ONLY CREATE SPIRITED COMPETITION TO KEEP PRICES DOWN WE NEED TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO WORK WITH OUR CUSTOMERS AS MANY OF THEM HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS THAT WE PREFORM FOR THEM IN ORDER 70 KEEP COSTS DOWN AND THEIR EMPLOYEES WORKING. JORGE 11OLLAND ESIDENT PACIFIC DISPOSAL, INC PA IFIC NON-FERROUS, INC. THESE ARE THE MAJOR POINTS 1 SEE THAT STAFF HAS NOT FULLY EXPLORED ALTERNATIVES TO, OR DO NOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT TO THE CITIZENS AND BUSINESS COMMUNITY. 1. AS PER THE PRESENT FRANCHISE AGREEMENT THERE IS NO RATE SCHEDULE PRESENTLY IN PLACE THAT COVERS ROLL -OFF SERVICE IN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, MEANING THAT IF THIS URGENCY CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM IS ADOPTED COMPETITIVE PRICING AND SERVICE WILL BE ELIMINATE. 2. THE COUNTY HAS IMPLEMENTED A REPORTING PROCESS WHEREBY ALL PERMITTED TRASH HAULERS MUST REPORT THEIR TONNAGES, BE IT TRASH OR RECYCLABLE ITEMS TO THE COUNTY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS BY CITY. THESE FIGURES ARE USED IN FIGURING THE TOTAL TONNAGES GENERATED BY EACH CITY. 3. WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT ON THE CITY IF THE WASTE FLOW AGREEMENT IS NOT SIGNED BY ALL THE MEMBER CITIES ? 4. THE CURRENT CONTRACTOR HAULS 95% OF ALL WASTE GENERATED WITHIN THE CITY NOW. THE COUNTY IS ASKING FOR A 50% COMMITMENT AT THIS TIME, THEREFOR BY VIRTUE OF THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT YOU NOW HAVE FLOW CONTROL ON 95% OF YOUR WASTE STREAM, WHICH UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS MORE THAN SATISFIES THE PROPOSED COUNTY FLOW CONTROL AND THE STATE MANDATED A.B. 939 REQUIREMENT. 5. PACIFIC DISPOSAL, INC IS THE ONLY WASTE HAULER THAT OWNS AND OPERATES A INDEPENDENT WOOD RECYCLING FACILITY, THAT, UNLIKE THE COUNTY LANDFILL, RECYCLES WOOD WASTES INTO COMPOST THAT QUALIFIES FOR 100% A.B. 939 CREDITS,WHERE THE COUNTY LANDFILL IS TAKING 90% OF THE WOOD WASTE GENERATED FROM THE CITIES TO USE AS FUEL FOR CO -GENERATION PLANTS THAT ONLY RECEIVES A 10% CREDIT TOWARDS YOUR CITIES A.B. 939 REQUIREMENT. 6. YOU PROPOSE TO LIMIT THE CITIZENS OF NATIONAL CITY TO ONE CHOICE FOR ROLL -OFF SERVICE. WE DON'T BELIEVE SUFFICIENT FACTS HAVE BEEN PRESENTED AT THIS TIME TO WARRANT AN URGENCY CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM ON THIS ISSUE. ALSO IS THIS FAIR TO YOUR CITIZENS? 7. I RESPECTIVELY ASK THAT YOU DELAY ACTION ON THESE MATTER UNTIL A FULL SET OF FACTS CAN BE DEVELOPED THAT REFUTE OR SUPPORT THESE ACTIONS.. maa moo smi DEBRIS BOX (619) 231-6609 FAX 238-5725 1845 LOGAN AVENUE • SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92113 May 25, 1993 Mayor George H. Waters City of National City 1243 National City Blvd. National City, CA 91950 RE : Agenda Item No. 4, Resolution 93-63 Dear Mayor Waters; As a supplier of roll -off trash box service to the construction and demolition industry, I believe that extending the exclusive contract with Edco Disposal Corporation to include "waste material pertaining to building operations" (i.e., construction debris) is not in the best interests of the City of National City for the following reasons : 1) THE MEASURE IS UNNECESSARY TO ACHIEVE SOLID WASTE FLOW CONTROL National City can require all trash haulers operating in the City to commit to haul all non -recyclable solid waste to the County landfill and to report on and certify such activity on a periodic basis. 2) THE MEASURE WILL ADD COSTS TO TAXPAYERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS Exclusive arrangements eliminate competition in price and service for which the taxpayers and property owners of National City will pay in the future. If you have any doubts, please take a survey of contractors and property owners doing work in other San Diego County trash hauling franchise cities regarding pricing and/or service for trash hauling. 3) UNNECESSARY EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENTS ARE CONTRARY TO GOOD PUBLIC POLICY Good public_ policy promotes: competition; innovation; creation of small business; adequate public discussion of issues affecting the common good; and open bids where an Exclusive Agreement is deemed to be in the best interests of the public. Current State and Federal legislation and sentiment is geared to encourage small business and foster competition and innovation. Expansion of the existing Exclusive Agreement would appear to be contrary to the trend of current public policy. DEB IS BO 16. mbm NO moi IN V (619) 231-6609 FAX 238-5725 1845 LOGAN AVENUE • SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92113 There has been no adequate public discussion in National City that an Exclusive Agreement is necessary to achieve the solid waste flow to the County landfills, nor discussion of the impact on small business to creating a monopoly arrangement. There is no reason to tie the hauling of construction debris to the general refuse hauling contract. There are many companies that can offer this service and they should be allowed to compete. ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL 1) Review the facts - National City already exceeds the minimum 50% flow of solid waste to the County landfill with the existing refuse hauling arrangement. Since the City currently exceeds the minimum landfill requirement there is no reason to rush a vote on an Exclusive Agreement. All trash haulers operating in National City can be licensed and required to use County landfills and to adequately report and certify to such use. 2) Take action - Require all trash haulers to be licensed for business in National City. Require all licensed trash haulers to use County landfills. Require uniform reporting and attesting of all licensed trash haulers. I will sincerely appreciate your thoughtful consideration of the issues. Yours truly, 1 Gregg J. F; U.S. Refuse Services, Inc. 4180 Ruffin Road, Ste. 110, San Diego, CA 92123 • Phone (619) 268-7081 Fax (619) 268-7080 May 24, 1993 George H. Waters, Mayor George H. Eiser, III, City Attorney Lori Anne Peoples, City Clerk City of National City RE: Council Agenda Statement Agenda Item No. 4 Please accept this letter as proper notice of our disagreement to your proposed action regarding the granting of a monopoly to the Edco Corporation relating to waste removal services in National City. I sincerely doubt anyone has performed a price comparison survey to find out what happens to the end user when there is only one source for a particular service available. It has been known for years in our industry that when a particular company has the exclusive franchise rights the rates to those customers are higher than to those customers when they must compete with other businesses. The great majority of the waste removed from already hauled to the county landfill. This designed to keep competition out of National The other cities involved have not deemed it this restriction in order to comply with the accomplished. We urge you to reconsider this matter as it will only benefit one extremely large corporation and hurt numerous small businesses. National City is measure was purely City. necessary to impose mission being Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Dominick Di Vello President DD/cr City of National City Public Works Department 2100 Hoover Ave., National City, CA 91950-6599 (619) 336-4360 April 26, 1993 TO FINANCE DEPARTMENT FROM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SUBJECT 2% FRANCHISE FEE EDCO 1. Contract calls for fee to jump from 2% to 5% the first rate change, then increase 1% yearly there after. 2. First year, Council required rate to stay at 2% to hold costs down. 3. For FY-93, original was prepared based upon 5%. Prior to council meeting, I requested a rate proposal at 2%, anticipating Council might lower, see EDCO 27 July attached. 4. Not only did Council go for staying at 2%, but also "negotiated a rate change to $11.10 for single family as proposed by Mr. Burr; with the full revised rate structure based upon the $11.10 SF rate to be submitted and appended to the resolution. (See Minutes of 07/28/92). 5. EDCO provided the revised rate, clearly stating the 2% fee inclusion (Edco 29 July 92). Such rate was transmitted to City Clerk by my 07/29/92 attached. CRW:jm copy to: City Clerk 4\ C.R.\WILLIAMS, JR. Publi Works Director ® Recycled Paper