HomeMy WebLinkAbout27-City Administrator
o
o
C I T Y 0 F SAN B ERN A R DIN 0
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE
DATE: September 10, 1992
TO: The Mayor and Common Council
FROM: Shauna Clark, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Refuse Operations - Private Haulers
COPIES: Manuel Moreno, Jr., Director of Public Services; James
Penman, City Treasurer
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the last year, the Mayor's Office, the City Attorney's Office,
the Department of Public Services and this office have discussed
the dilemma we face in dealing with private refuse haulers. with
the advent of AB 939 recycling mandates and penalties,
comprehensive solid waste management planning is imperative.
The time has come to seek some general direction from the Mayor and
Council.
The Health and Safety Code allows private refuse haulers to
continue their accounts for five years after territory has been
annexed to the city. The Municipal Code has extended that five
year grace periOd by another five years for private refuse haulers
who have obtained permits from the City.
Presently there are no private haulers who have permits to operate
within our city limits but Jack's Disposal, Cal Disposal, Curran's
Disposal, and BFI are servicing approximately 681 commercial and
residential accounts. It is estimated by the Department of Public
Services that these accounts equal $1,000,000 in annual proceeds
for the private haulers.
It was mentioned that San Bernardino faces a dilemma because we
have not aggressively enforced our own codes as they pertain to
private haulers. In preparation for AB 939, however, we have
established staff to do so for meeting the recycling mandate. One
view is that the city and its commercial businesses are losing
money. Others feel that as we have not pursued enforcement, the
private haulers have a vested right to the accounts they have been
servicing. In either case, failing to meet AB 939 requirements
through controlling and reporting adequate waste diversion can
result in a $10,000 per day fine. We have now reached a crossroad:
either enforce or allow with attainable reporting requirements.
#~7
1-
o
o
Cons:
It would be difficult to develop proposals for
negotiations because each side would have their own
perception of prime territory and economic value.
There would be some disruption of customer service as
residents who are city refuse customers might not like
the idea of going to a private vendor and vice versa.
No guarantee that private haulers would not resist future
annexation attempts.
The camel's nose would be under the tent. Privates may
try to negotiate for more territory as time goes on and
city would revisit issue over and over again.
The city would have to work with private haulers on solid
waste issues. Without complete cooperation, achieving AB
939 mandates might be difficult. Since the haulers will
incur costs to show adequate waste diversion for other
cities and county zones, there will be an incentive to
use prime San Bernardino recyclables for the benefit of
other agencies' compliance with AB 939.
Alternative 3 -- Neaotiate a business trade
If the Mayor and Council do not favor aggressive enforcement, my
recommendation is that we attempt to negotiate a business trade
with the private haulers now operating in the city. A business
trade would work as follows: the private haulers would be allowed
to service temporary accounts but once an account became permanent,
it would become city property.
It is my understanding that private haulers make a large profit
from providing construction roll off bins on big construction jobs
and smaller bins for people who are remodeling their homes and
businesses.
I propose that we allow existing private haulers to compete with us
for roll-off business but once construction is finished and the c/o
is issued, that account becomes the property of the City of San
Bernardino.
Pros:
Might be able to work out amicable settlement--a win,
win.
Could charge a franchise fee.
No enforcement. All competitive.
Cons:
Would still have AB 939 problems.
I have no idea if they will go for this idea.
- 3 -
1----
o
o
Camel's nose still under tent.
No guarantee they won't try to thwart us on future
annexations.
Alternative 4 -- status Quo
Could retain status quo two ways:
ordinance to extend time period
1.
do nothing.
2.
amend
Pros:
Avoids litigation and enforcement costs.
Cons:
City continues to lose lucrative commercial accounts.
Privates may encroach farther into our territory and we
may reach a point that we cannot limit them. This might
be similar to the ambulance situation where our inaction
has made it difficult to take action.
Inaction on part of city may be signal to all private
haulers, not just the ones here now, that San Bernardino
is wide open.
No control for AB 939 purposes.
Alternative 5 -- Buv Out Illeaal Accounts from Private Haulers
Pros:
Avoids litigation.
City gains total control over solid waste management.
After payback period, city profits from accounts.
Cons:
Costs unknown.
Might involve lengthy negotiations.
No guarantee privates would continue to honor our
boundaries.
~?/L?~-U/
~ity Administrator
- 4 -