HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 4 SOLID WASTE RPT 08-03-92PUBLIC HEARING N0. 4
1 Q 8-3-92
- Inter -Com ''��T,�
NTE: JULY 28, 1992
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RONALD A. NAULT, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 92-97 ADOPTING THE 1992-93 SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION ASSESSMENT REPORT
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 92-97 approving the 1992-93 Solid Waste
Collection Assessment Report and direct the Finance Director to
place -the new assessments on the tax role for fiscal 1992-93.
DISCUSSION:
The annual adjustment of the rates for solid waste collection has
three separate components, the collection charge; the disposal
charge and the Material Recovery Facility (MRF) charge. Each
component is adjusted by a different factor. The collection charge
is adjusted based on the weighted average of seven separate cost
categories which are verified with the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
For 1992-93 this component will increase by 2.7 percent.
The disposal charge is a direct pass through of the County land
fill charges. The County did not increase their land fill fees so
far this year so, there will not be an increase for this component
during 1992-93. The third component is the MRF charges. The MRF
Contract calls for an annual CPI adjustment with a 4 percent
minimum and a 7 percent maximum. The current CPI is 3.6 percent so
the 4 percent minimum will be applied to the MRF costs for 1992-93.
The total allowable increase for 1992-93 is 3.3 percent, $0.38 per
month; $4.56 per year per unit.
In addition to the basic rate there is an additional $0.25 per
month, $3.00 per year, that we collect to provide for delinquencies
and the public information cost of our recycling program as
required by AB 939 and spelled out in detail in the City's Source
Recovery Recycling Element (SRRE).
As allowed for in our Amended Franchise Agreement, we have adjusted
the disposal cost portion of our rate down $0.97 per month based on
the confirmed tonnages of residential waste transported to the MRF.
In addition to this adjustment we have received a refund of
$109,871 from Great Western Reclamation based on the difference
from the estimated tonnage used to establish the 1991-92 rates and
Page 2
July 28, 1992
Solid Waste Rates
the actual tonnage collected. This is a retrospective adjustment
and can change from year to year based on habits of residential
customers. Referring to Exhibit "C", there may be an indication
that the tonnage is trending up. If that is the case then the
change will be reflected in next years rates.
My recommendation is to approve the new rate for single family
units of $10.91 per month, $130.92 per year, a reduction of $9.84
from 1991-92 and approve the rates for commercial service at $11.33
per month, $135.96 per year, a reduction of $9.84 from 1991-92.
I further recommend that we deposit the $109,871 refund check into
a trust account to be used to offset the significant disposal rate
increase we are expecting for 1993-94. One of the main reasons our
rates are so favorable this year is due to the County's failure to
increase their land fill fees. Over the last few years they've
increased an average of 20 percent. Next year we expect that they
will increase in the range of 25 percent to 30 percent. If they do
pass an increase of that level it will impact our rates by about 28
percent. It will more than double the savings we're proposing for
this year. By banking the refund this year we can use it to
mitigate next year's increase.
Attached are several exhibits that support the changes in the
rates. The information on Exhibit "F" has been verified with the
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Ronald A. Nault
Director of Finance
RAN: 1s
Attachments
w trashfee.wah
DRAFT EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TUSTIN
MRF PROCESSING COSTS
COSTS
Handling and Hauling to Landfill
Disposal at Landfill
Processing for Recovery
Total Cost
SAVINGS
Materials Revenue
Diverted Disposal Cost
Total Cost
Net Cost
Current
$/Ton
$15.19
$22.75
$15.00
$52.94
July 1 st
Proposed
Increase
$/Ton
$0.61
" $15.80
$0.00
" " $22.75
$0_60"
1� 5_60
$1.21
$54.15
($10.50)
$0.00 ($10.50)
($5.69)
$0.00 X5.691
($16.19)
$0.00 ($16.19)
$36.75
$1.21 $37.96
Per section 5 of the Amendment to the agreement, Contract is
allowed an adjustment to the MRF charges for changes in the Consumer
Price Index for all Urban Consumers, for Los Angeles - Anaheim -
Riverside CMSA. The April - April Index is 3.6%. Since this falls
below the contract floor increase of 4%, we will use 4%.
No Disposal increase has been imposed by the County of Orange.
10
11
DRAFT
• RATE CALCULATION
HAULING CHARGE
DISPOSAL CHARGE
TOTAL RATE
CITY OF TUSTIN EXHIBIT B
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL RATE
CURRENT
PROPOSED
INCREASE/
$/UNIT/MO
$/UNIT/MO
DECREASE
5.20
5.34 *
0.14
6.43
5.32 * *
-1.11
11.63
10.66
-0.97
* $5.20 X 1.-0277(MODIFIED CPI) SEE ATTACHED
"COMPUTATION OF TRASH COLLECTION RATES"
* * 64.7 (ACTUAL POUNDS PER UNIT PER WEEK)X 52 WKS/12 MOS./2000 LBS.X
$37.96(PROPOSED RATE PER TON)
SEE ATTACHED "ANALYSIS OF DISPOSAL CHARGES"
DRAFT
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF TUSTIN
ANALYSIS OF DISPOSAL CHARGE
MRF
Total
Tons/Unit
Pounds/Unit
Actual Residential Volume and Units
Tonnage
Units
Per Month
Per Week
July 1991
900.61
6,904
0.130
60.2
August 1991
1,134.72
6,907
0.164
75.8
September 1991
865.11
6,907
0.125
57.8
October 1991
918.70
6,912
0.133
61.3
November 1991
983.53
6,916
0.142
65.6
December 1991
833.06
6,917
0.120
55.6
January 1992
1,021.96
6,922
0.148
68.1
February 1992
861.13
6,933
0.124
57.3
March 1992
921.64
6,943
0.133
61.3
April 1992
1,088.53
6,969
0.156
72.1
May 1992
1,147.97
6,975
0.165
76.0
Totals
10,676.96
76,205
0.140
64.7
Average
970.63
6,928
0.140
64.7
Pounds/Unit/Week
64.7
DRAFT EXHIBIT D
CITY OF TUSTIN
ADJUSTMENT FOR OVERESTIMATE OF RESIDENTIAL WASTE GENERATION
JULY 1, 1991 -JUNE 30, 1992
ESTIMATED POUNDS/UNIT/WEEK 81.0
ACTUAL POUNDS PER WEEK "" 64.7
OVERESTIMATE OF WASTE GENERATION 16.3
X AVERAGE NUMBER UNITS PER MONTH
. (JULY 1991 -MAY 1992) 6928
X WEEKS PER YEAR 52
/ POUNDS PER TON 2000
X CURRENT RATE PER TON3$ 6.75
TOTAL DOLLARS FROM OVERESTIMATE $107,901.18
SEE ATTACHED "ANALYSIS OF DISPOSAL CHARGES"
DRAFT
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
CITY OF TUSTIN
ADJUST TRASH COLLECTION RATES
JULY 1, 1992
COLL DISPOSAL
1.0270 1.0329
EXHIBIT E
CURRENT RATES
PROPOSED RATES
CATEGORY
COLL
DISPOSAL
TOTAL
COLL
DISPOSAL
TOTAL
2 YD
ix
42.23
15.93
58.16
43.37
16.45
59.82
2X
62.30
31.85
94.15
63.98
32.90
96.88
3X
82.31
47.78
130.09
84.53
49.35
133.88
4X
102.39
63.70
166.09
105.15
65.80
170.95
5X
122.41
79.63
202.04
125.72
82.25
207.96
toC
142.43
95.55
237.98
146.28
98.69
244.97
3 YD
ix
56.82
23.89
80.71
58.35
24.68
83.03
2X
81.52
47.78
129.30
83.72
49.35
133.07
3X
106.26
71.66
177.92
109.13
74.02
183.15
4X
129.10
95.55
224.65
132:59
98.69
231.28
5X
153.85
119.44
273.29
158.00
123.37
281.37
�jC : •
178.54
143.33
321.87
183.36
148.05
331.41
4 YD
1 X
59.42
31.85
91.27
61.02
32.90
93.92
2X
89.51
63.70
153.21
91.93
65.80
157.72
3X
119.16
95.55
214.71
122.38
98.69
221.07
4X
149.08
127.40
276.48
153.11
131.59
284.70
5X
179.02
159.25
338.27
183.85
164.49
348.34
�C
208.91
191.20
400.11
214.55
197.49
412.04
RESIDENTIAL
5.20
6.43
11.63
5.34
5.32
10.66
COMMERCIAL CAN " 5.62
6.43
12.05
5.76
5.32
11.08
" The 1.0329 is the increase in
the MRF processing cost divided by the current
$/ton($1.21/$36.75)
The commercial can rate was adjusted in accordance
with the
method used
for
residential. The disposal continues to match
the residential
rate
and the
collection program of the charge remains at $.42 above the residential rate.
DRAFT
CITY OF TUSTIN
COMPUTATION OF TRASH COLLECTION RATES
JULY 1, 1992
EXHIBIT F
TIME
CONTRACT
CATEGORY/SOURCE
PERIOD
PRIOR
NEW
%
WEIGHT
%
AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS)
LOCAL 396 WAGES
MAY 1991/92
10.8
11.05
2.3%
0.3300
0.76°x6
GASOLINE/
CPI (UNADJ) US CITY AVG
ALL URBAN CONSUMERS (SS4701A)
APRIL 1991/92
95.9
94.8
-1.1%
0.0900
-0.10%
MOTOR TRUCKS/
PPI CODE 114
MAY 1991/92
121.5
129
6.2%
0.0650
0.40%
- GENERAL PURPOSE MOCH & EQUIP/
PPI CODE 114
MAY 1991/92
127.3
130.1
2.2%
0.1325
0.29%
AUTOMOTIVE PARTS & EQUIP/
PPI CODE 116605
MAY 1991/92
119.3
126.3
5.9%
0.0225
0.13%
FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS
PPI CODE 107
MAY 1991/92
122.9
122.2
-0.6%
0.0200
-0.01%
ALL OTHER
CPI LA/LONG BEACH/ANAHEIM
(UNADJUSTED) ALL URBAN
CONSUMERS, ALL ITEMS
APR 1991/92
140.70
146.00
3.6%
0.3400
1.22%
TOTAL
1.000
2.70%
SOURCE: US DEPT OF LABOR; BUREAU OF
LABOR STATISTICS 213-252-7521
Exhibit G
Orange County Unincorporated
Yorba Linda
Orange
Los Alamitos
Cypress
Mission Viejo
Stanton
Brea
San Juan Capistrano
La Palma
Placentia
Costa Mesa
Anaheim
La Habra
Buena Park
San Clemente
Irvine
Laguna Beach
Fountain Valley
Garden Grove
Dana Point
Laguna Niguel
Huntington Bch
Santa Ana
Fullerton
Westminster
EI Toro
Lake Forest
Rancho Santa Margarita
Villa Park
Rossmoor
Seal Beach
County Average
Proposed Tustin Rate
Source: City of Santa Ana Survey 7/92
$11.27
$10.91
$13.78
13.52
10.50
11.96
11.87
11.85
11.85
10.33
11.58
11.55
11.43
11.68
10.99
10.50
10.12
9.83
9.50
8.25
11.55
11.22
10.96
10.93
10.89
11.86
9.55
4.00
13.58
13.58
13.58
12.85
12.64
12.25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION 92-97
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
SECTION 5473 ET SEQ. OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING A
REPORT RELATIVE TO PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY RECEIVING
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES, DETERMINING THE
CHARGES FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION TO BE ASSESSED
AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND AS THEY
APPEAR ON THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT ROLL.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve
as follows:
1. That proceedings were duly instituted, conducted and
completed pursuant to provisions of Section 5473 et seq. of the
Health and Safety Code of the State of California.
A. A written report dated July, 1992 containing a
description of each parcel of real property receiving solid waste
collection services and facilities and the amount of the charge
proposed to be levied upon each parcel for the collection of solid
waste for the fiscal year 1992-93 was prepared and filed with the
City Clerk of the City of Tustin on July, 1992.
B. That a public hearing to hear and consider all
objections or protests, if any, to the aforesaid report and
proposed charges was duly set for August 3, 1992 at 7:00 o'clock
p.m. in the Senior Center of the City of Tustin at 200 South "C"
Street, Tustin, California.
C. Said hearing was duly noticed as required by law, by
publication once each week for two successive weeks on July 23,
and July 30, 1992 in the Tustin News, a newspaper of general
circulation printed and published in the City of Tustin.
D. At the aforesaid time and place the duly noticed
hearing was held and all persons who were present were heard and
all comments, objections and protests to the aforesaid report and
proposed charges were duly heard and considered by the City
Council.
E. The charges proposed in the aforesaid report are fair
and reasonable, are commensurate with the services provided, and
the charge therefore should properly be collected on the tax roll
in the same manner, by the same persons and at the same time as,
together with and not separately from, general taxes.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2
Solid Waste Resolution
#92-97
2. The City Council hereby elects to have the charges set
forth in the aforesaid report collected on the tax roll in the
same manner, by the same persons, at the'same time as, and
together with and not separately from its general taxes and
hereby authorizes that such charges be collected on the tax roll,
as all prescribed to the provisions of Health and Safety Code
Section 5473 et seq.
3. The resolution shall be effective following its
adoption by a two-thirds vote of the members of the City Council
and shall remain in force and effect and said charges shall be
collected in the manner as aforesaid for the year 1992-93 and
for each subsequent year as authorized by the hereinabove
referenced sections of the Health and Safety Code.
4. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to forthwith
file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Auditor of the
County of Orange, together with a copy of the hereinabove -
described report, and a statement endorsed thereon over her
signature that the said report has been finally adopted by the
City Council of the City of Tustin.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Tustin, California, held on the 3rd
day of August , 1992.
ATTEST:
Mary Wynn
City Clerk
City of Tustin
a:solidast.fee
Leslie Anne Pontious
Mayor