The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-Public Services ~... .....r,. ~.-..... --,..."..---~------ From: James P. Howell Asst. Director ...,.; Subject: RESOLU~N REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT TO AUTHORIZE THE REFUND OF THE UNOB- LIGATED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TRUST FUND MONIES. ""~ Dept: public Services Date: December 6, 1994 Synopsis of Previous Council action: On August 20, 1990 Resolution 90-353 Implementing East Valley Coalition Approved. On September 9, 1992 Resolution 92-365 Disbursing East valley coalition Funds approved. Recommended motion: Adopt Resolution. Di~HI . '~b'.k'J.Cf.1 DEC 9< 4: 54 --~ , / .""7~"./' /1' '2 _ /~' .;,<,,~ ~c- - Signature " , Contact person: James P. Bowell, Asst. Director Phone: 384-5140 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Resolution Ward: All FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: NOTE: This will return Amount: N / A approximately $419,714.58 Source: (Acct. No.) to Refuse Enterprise Fund. (Acct. Descriotionl Finance: Council Notes: 75.0262 Agenda Item No 'I CJTY OF SAN BERN~DINO - REQUEST ~R COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939), as amended, required all cities and counties to prepare and implement Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRRE) and Household Hazardous Waste Elements (HHWE) of an Integrated Waste Management Plan. The necessary studies and analyses to prepare plans for compliance with Assembly Bill 939 were performed on a regional basis. In August of 1990, the cities of COLTON, FONTANA, GRAND TERRACE, HIGHLAND, LOMA LINDA, REDLANDS, RIALTO, SAN BERNARDINO, YUCAIPA, and the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) as "The East Valley Coalition" (EVC) for a period of two years to fund and obtain consulting services to study waste composition and management practices within the East Valley an~ develop SRRE and HHWE for each jurisdiction pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 40000 et. seq. The MOU further authorized the County of San Bernardino Department of Solid Waste Management to include a landfill fee surcharge of $1 per ton to accomplish these mandates of AB 939. cities in the West end of San Bernardino valley made a similar agreement. On June 8, 1992, the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino county, California reserved the balance of the EVC AB 939 Waste Characterization Trust Fund and designated it for future AB 939 related studies and/or programs. On January 11, 1993, roughly 23 months ago, the San Bernardino county Board of Supervisors authorized a Material Recovery Facility/Transfer Station composting Facility study by SCS Engineers for $85,968 to determine East Valley solid waste processing facility needs and report on siting possibilities for necessary projects. The City of San Bernardino has performed site feasibility comparisons and site assessments in conjunction with this study to prepare for a regional facility. The current.unobligated balance for the East Valley Coalition AB 939 Waste Characterization Trust Fund is $1,397,197.36. EVC members anticipated using the surplus for consultant studies to draft Non Disposal Facility Elements (NDFEs) and to revise the SRREs per new legislation. However, NDFEs were completed in-house by all EVC staff and the State has indicated a simple letter of addendum will suffice for SRRE revision. Likewise, West End Cities have completed appropriate studies. This leaves no foreseeable joint use of the surplus funding. The San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors has concurred with the recommendation of the Solid Waste Advisory Task Force to refund the excess monies in the Waste Characterization Trust Fund. A total of $470,549.03 in revenue was collected for the City of San Bernardino's waste stream. The funds expended on behalf of the city of San Bernardino to comply with AB 939 totaled $50,834.45, leaving $419,714.58 of unobligated funds to be refunded to the city. 75-0264 c :> RESOLtJ'1'ION NO. 1 2 3 4 A RESOLUTION OF THE KAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT TO AUTHORIZE THE REFUND OF THE UNOBLIGATED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TRUST FUND MONIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $419,714.58. WHEREAS, in August of 1990, the cities of COLTON, FONTANA, 5 GRAND TERRACE, HIGHLAND, LOMA LINDA, REDLANDS, RIALTO, SAN 6 BERNARDINO, YUCAIPA, and the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO entered into 7 a Memorandum of understanding (MOU) as the "East Valley Coalition" 8 for a period of two years to fund and obtain consulting services to 9 study waste composition and management practices within the East 10 Valley and develop Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRREs) 11 and Household Hazardous Waste Elements (HHWES) for each 12 jurisdiction, pursuant to public Resources Code section 40000 et 13 Seq. The MOU further authorized the county of San Bernardino 14 Department of solid Waste Management to include a landfill fee 15 surcharge of $1 per ton to accomplish these mandates of AB 939. 16 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County of 17 the State of California authorized on June 8, 1992, the solid Waste 18 Management Department to reserve the balance of the East Valley 19 coatlition AB 939 Waste Characterization Trust Fund for future AB 20 939 related studies and/or programs and, 21 WHEREAS, on January 11, 1993, the San Bernardino County Board 22 of supervisors authorized a Material Recovery Facility/Transfer 23 station/Composting Facility study by SCS Engineers for $85,968 to 24 determine solid waste processing facility needs and report on 25 siting possibilities for necessary projects and, 26 WHEREAS, the current unobligated balance for the East valley 27 coalition AB 939 Waste Characterization Trust Fund is 28 $1,397,197.36, and, 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 """ ...,.; A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF THB CONTRACT TO AUTHORIZB THB REFUND OF THE UNOBLIGATED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TRUST FUND MONI!S IN THE AMOUNT OF $419,714.58. o WHEREAS, the East Valley Coalition has not incurred costs in the past 23 months performing joint projects related to AB 939, and WHEREAS, the East Valley Coalition foresees no mutually beneficial projects requiring use of this funding, and WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors has concurred with the recommendation of the Solid Waste Advisory Task Force to refund to each participating City, the excess monies in the Waste Characterization Trust Fund, NOW THEREFORB, be it resolved that the Mayor and Common Council of The City of San Bernardino, in consideration of the foregoing, and the covenents and conditions of the attached County of San Bernardino F A S STANDARD CONTRACT approve the receipt of the refund in the amount of $419,714.58. and the conditions set , forth. 1/1/ 1/1/ II/I II/I 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1/1/ 1 2 o 0 A RESOLUTION OF THB MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT TO AUTHORIZE THE REFUND OF THE UNOBLIGATED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TRUST FUND MONIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $419,714.58. 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly 4 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the city of San 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the day of , 1994, by the following vote, to wit: Abstain ~ ~ ~ Council Members: NEGRETE CURLIN HERNANDEZ OBERHELMAN DEVLIN POPE-LUDLAM MILLER City Clerk The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this , 1994. day of Tom Minor, Mayor City of San Bernardino Approved as to form and legal content: James F. Penman, city Attorney By: December 5, 1994 - ~ ". ,....." \000101"""" r lJ". "''''lor V.ndor Cod. O.pt, ' SC;' AI Cont..CI Numb.r OIPt. Contr8l;:to,'. L.le.nll No. County Df SIn B"nlrdlno ,,",ht, 386-8718 Obl/A.v Sourco 9990 "mount 01 COnt..;t $1.397.197.36 ,".tivlty /~AOJ/JO. Numb.. FAS STANDARD CONTRACT Add,... e.timatld Plymtnt FY Amount 110 110 . !'roj.e. N.m. 94/95 51.397.197.36_ j Refund of Waste I ~aracte~on 1= - IU&t Fun Revenues - THIS CONTRACT i. entered Into in the Stete of Cellfornil by and between the County of Sen Bernerdlno. here/nefter c'lIed the County. Ind N..... The ciliel of Chino, Colton. Pontana, &cwd ~U."I;I .!t1ad.dkud. LuUIA Lh.adk. Montclllir, Ontario. Rancho Cucamonga, tuano, :san &temarwno, LJPWlG ana Yucaipa end the County of San Bernardino Ii"., e,l. hereinefter cellld N/A _.. IIta,rlllD No. Dr 5001.1 lRurit'( No. IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I1JH .p,o, Mia", IIld llIdir_IIIomI'.If". Sor f.rth ..rvle. 10 M rlnrilrod. '/nO",,, 10 M UId. _r .f Hymen" _ for f1Irl"""'nGI or oomplltlon, dlt,rmlnltIon .f.lti.f,otory PlrfonnInc, ,nd"..,., for '_inltion, .,.or"m" end COnd/'ion,. ,nd .rrlOh",.",. 'lJICifiwtionl. ,nd '_d.. if eny.1 RRCIT.4.r.~ WHEREAS, the cities of Chino. Colton. Fontana, Grand Terrace, Hl&hJand, Loma LInde, Montclair. Ontario. Rancho Cucamon'I, Rialto. San Bernardino, Upland, and Yucaipa and the County of San Bernardino entered into agreements for I period of two years to fund and obtain consulting services to study wasle composition and IIIlLl1Ipment practices to develop Source Reduction and Recyclina fJc,ments (SRRBs), Household Huardous Waste E1ement8 (HHWBs), and Nondisposal Facility Elements (NDFEs) for each jurisdiction. pursuant to PRC I 40000 et scq. and referenced as the AB 939 of 1989: and. WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors authorized the Solid Waste ManBBCmeDt Dcpanment effective July I, 1990 to lnclude a $1.00 per ton surcharae for I period of two years endinll 1une 30, 1992 for the purpose of tundin, waste charecterization studiel to accomplish the state mandates of AB 939 of 1989; and, WHEREAS, the C\UrCnt UDobliaatcd balance of the Waste Characterization Trost Fund is $1,397,197.36 as shown on the attached Exhibit "A"; and. 1.11'11-000.... ",.1 P,;. 1 ot f~ WHEREAS, the cities of Chino. Colton. Fontana. Grand Terrace. Highland. Lorna Linda, Montclair. Ontario. RanC, Cucamonga, Rialto, San Bernardino~land. and Yucaipa and the County of San Bernardino foresee no mutually beneficial projects requiring use of the remaining obligated funds; and, WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County Solid Waste Advisory Task Force (SWATF) recommended that the current unobligated trust fund monies be refunded; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and following covenants and conditions, the parties agree as follows: 1. Each City acknowledges that it is aware that the County is relying on each City's promises, findings, acknowledgements and waivers as set forth herein (and identical promises, findings. acknowledgments and waivers from all other affected cities in San Bernardino County) relative to the return of certain solid waste disposal fees collected by the County and utilized by the County and the specified cities of San Bernardino County to undertake Waste Characterization, and other. studies as required by AB 939 ["Funds"]. 2. Each City acknowledges that the County intends to return the unused Funds to the specified cities of San Bernardino County as set forth on the attached Exhibit "A". 3. Each City fmds that the distribution of the Funds as provided on the attached Exhibit "A" is a fair and reasonable one and by adoption of this contract specifically waives any right it may have to seek or obtain any other or different distribution of the Funds. 4. Each City agrees that it will use the portion of the Funds returned to it in conformity with the purpose of the original collection of said Funds; that is. for solid waste purposes related to the planning or implementation of programs to meet the requirements of AB 939. For the purposes hereof. such conforming use will be referred to as a use which satisfies the "Nexus Test". 5, Each City agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the San Bernardino County Solid Waste Management Department and the County and their authorized agents. officers. volunteers and employees against any and all claims or actions arising from the City's receipt of the returned Funds or from its expenditure of such Funds and for any costs or expenses incurred by the Department, County or their authorized agents, officers, volunteers and employees on account of any cl~ therefore. This indemnification includes. without limit, any claim or action arising from a City's breach of any warranty set forth herein or other failure of such city's use of the Funds to satisfy the Nexus Test and. further, the cost or expenses related thereto including any monetary loss to the County occasioned by such breach or failure. The County shall have the right to provide (or to select its own counsel to provide) a legal defense for itself at the cost of the City. Each city reserves the right to provide its own legal defense. 2 of 17 If a city fails to satisfy the 1;:lexus Test as determined by a court of c9I.Qpetent jurisdiction or by any independent party mutualCcceptable to the City and County, tho~..Junds shall be reallocated by the City for alternative projects which will meet the Nexus Test. If the project is determined not to meet the Nexus Test, a city has sixty (60) days (the "Reallocation Period") to reallocate those Funds to a project which satisfies the Nexus Test. Each City will confirm reallocation of the Funds to the County through a financial report (including substantiating documentation). Failure to reallocate Funds utilized on a project not meeting the Nexus Test will result in those Funds being returned to the County ("Returned Funds") until such time as projects to utilize the Returned Funds are submined by the City which meet the Nexus Test. Returned Funds shall be remitted to the County within thirty (30) days following the end of the Reallocation Period if the City fails to reallocate those Funds as require herein. No reallocation of Funds or other action to rectify the failure of a City's use of the Funds to satisfy the Nexus Test shall relieve a city from its duty to indemnify the County as otheIWise provided for herein. /1111/11111/11/11111111111/11/1111111111/111/1111111111/11/111111111111/1111111111111111111111/11/11/11111111111111/111111/11111111111111/11/111 ~:JU'V!"Y '...:;:: ~;...,\~ 2ERNA~C:i'HJ - ..':::il~~ar.. ~CiJ~~ cr Suce"'.'ls'J''':: l.5tare If ::o,.uorano::, ccmpanv, ere.,' :.:atec Bv · ':'vtncr'zec =a..,a::...'"el -:r:v -.:;: -'';;:: _'S~....M=:'~-- -....5 3EE:'J CC__. ~2E:p -:~ -HE C:-;A1FiM~~~ - -: -:~:: :: .:.=- ._~ -. .--: ___. _ ,-r ':;.._':' ::--<:' -~':;-:J'....:::1::':; S~~n _,-"'r::'~:;: -'~"'<,..""''' ': ';"'~""'" -::C' I i 1 - ~, ~~--- :,,, IO/~/~(/ , ~"'J'ew,,1.; .~. :. -"f$; -0 ','7' -.. ' . '''"''k-- . I" // ,.. . I '--I '('U';- '\~f(1 / ~-=-", - ~ , ] _ .' \;--1,"(-, " , , ."1 I 3 of 17 . " ~'" :f_ o 0 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION TRUST FUND REFUND EXHIBIT A CITIES: REFUND AMOUNTS: Chino $70,554.99 Colton $50,891.78 Fontana $134,213.97 Grand Terrace $0.00 Highland $5,706.25 Lorna Linda $0.00 Montclair $6,764.52 Ontario $156,570.22 Rancho Cucarnaonga $180,642.57 Rialto $203,115.17 San Bernardino $419,714.58 Upland $66,467.89 Yucaipa $28,522.41 Unincorporated County $74,033.02 ~ TOTAL: $1,397,197.36 . . 4 of 17 o o IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF CHINO MAYOR DATED: A TIESTED: CITY CLERK 5 of 17 c o IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF COLTON MAYOR DATED: ATTESTED: CITY CLERK 6 of 17 c .:> IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set fonh below. CITY OF FONTANA MAYOR DATED: A ITESTED: CITY CLERK 7 of 17 c o IN WIT!\'ESS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE MAYOR DATED: ATTESTED: CITY CLERK 8 of 17 c o IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set fonh below. CITY OF HIGHLAND MAYOR DATED: A TIESTED: CITY CLERK 9 of 17 ""'"'\ "wi IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the panies have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. o CITY OF LOMA LINDA MAYOR DATED: A ITESTED: CITY CLERK 10 of 17 c o N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF MONTCLAIR MAYOR DATED: ATTESTED: CITY CLERK 11 of 17 c o IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF ONTARIO MAYOR DATED: A TIESTED: CITY CLERK 12 of 17 o ~ "-' IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the panies have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MAYOR DATED: AITESTED: CITY CLERK 13 of 17 c :) IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF RlALTO MAYOR DATED: A ITESTED: CITY CLERK 14 of 17 c o IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF SA,'II BERNARDINO MA YOR DATED: ATTESTED: CITY CLERK IS of 17 c :> IN Wfr.l.CSS WHEREOF. the parties have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF UPLAND MAYOR DATED: ATTESTED: CITY CLERK 16 of 17 c ,-, "-' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the panies have hereto executed this Agreement on the date set fOM below. CITY OF YUCAIPA MAYOR DATED: A ITESTED: CITY CLERK 17 of 17