Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/30/93 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM July 30, 1993 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNC~ / FROM' ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. The opening of Silver Creek Park, thisweek,'was a noteworthy event. That, coupled with the nice response to the URM situation, made it a good week. 2. As I believe I have mentioned before, we are bringing in a financial advisor to assist on the Marks Roos Bond Pool. Their fee will be paid from the proceeds of the issue, if it happens. The reason for it is that it is an unusually complex issue, since it involves the Hotel. There are taxable bonds and we want to be extra careful to make sure everything is understood and cross-checked from as many directions as possible regarding the financial transactions. It is a safety net on the Hotel. 3. The members of Council who made the Goal Setting session set a list of "bullet" items, which is a starting point for Council Goals. The staff was instructed to translate these into overview headings and groupings. We are currently working on that. Particularly for the benefit of those who were not able to attend or who may wish to add ideas, the listing established at the first session is enclosed. 4. There are two responses to Council Referrals enclosed; one on a railroad crossing and one regarding Building Department Policy on Stop Work Orders. Also, at the Council Meeting, there was a request for the amount in Council Contingency which is also enclosed. 5. My contract calls for an annual evaluation, which occurs in March, and a short-version update six months after, which would translate to mid-August. A member of Council has asked me to calendar that. It would be an executive session. It is purely up to you as to the format and how much time it will consume. It is the March, rather than August, session which deals with money. 6. It is tentatively planned that the Development Services Building will have its occupants moving into it, at least on the first and second floors, toward the end of September. That depends upon the progress by the elevator contractor. Because of the need to do finish work, the Fire Department, on the third floor, would follow sometime after that. 7. The Intergovernmental Relations Committee meeting this week was fairly friendly. Separately, we had some good news from the County! Their staff has done a report strongly advocating to the Supervisors that they go to HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL July 30, 1993 Page -2- universal collection of garbage. They are to vote on August loth. We have even heard that we may get a counter proposal of some kind on the Fire Fund issue; however, that part is rumor, at this point. They did agree at the IGRC Meeting to, at least, monitor or participate in the Parks Maintenance District Study that we have going on. B. We have continued to dedicate a great deal of time to the Hotel project, this week. I continue to be pleased with the progress. We have a meeting scheduled next week with the bond underwriter and the bond attorney, and will be into substantive issues. Once again, all is not resolved, but I continue to be optimistic. AT. al b SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING WORKSHOP MONDAY, JULY 26, 1993 · complete convention center hotel ·imfill · take Care of infrastructure in existing property-what do' we do with what we have? · where are we regarding implementation of general plan? · fill,in northeast · infrastructure for future growth · provide open space · eliminate islands · how ,to provide efficient government services for metro area? · what .to do regarding County? · parks, recreation district · centennial · downtown cultural center · beltways · water in Kern River · what should we keep doing? public safety? · universal garbage system Summary of Council Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 26, 1993 Page 2 · why does Bakersfield exist? · why did you move here? · commissions/committees: use 'em or lose 'em · clearly define goals for commissions/committees · review commissions once a year · why did you stay in Bakersfield? · department heads reporting to city manager vs. civil service Cnon-accountability'') · further implementation of RSG study · address "overpaid" employees with labor unions . · labor, negotiation strategies · establish strategy now? · take the lead to realign government · if County passes $ parameters, what d.o we do? ~ $ what to do with the state? · become pro-active with the state · economic deVelopment--what industries to attract? · business retention Surnmaty of CounCil Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 26, 1993, Page 3 · help businesses expand · incentives for architecturally-significant buildings · review permit process · use business people to get ideas to streamline · sit down With vendors · pending legislation · review busines~ license fees · should business license $ be used to retain local businesses? · can we offset new programs with existing funds? · need to be fiscally ·solvent · review each service, the real cost of each, and prioritize. · review revenue "sharing" with County regarding annexations · hold joint City/County meetings to discuss various issues--full Council and full Board twice a year · if We don't have $ how can we strengthen employees mentally and morally? · what level of service should we provide? · · list services, send out survey, ask constituents Summary of COuncil Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 26, 1993 Page 4 · Kern River Parkway · intergovernmental joint ventures, conjunctive uses · develop .media promotion plan--sell what we've been doing well · send out news release--monthly? weekly? bi-weekly? · do we need a media person? · graffiti control' · tell press what's important · research "goof-off' product to eliminate graffiti · parents need to take responsibility for kids · government can't solve graffiti · gangs and drug issues in southeast Bakersfield · what to do through CAC? · nothing going on in Incentive Area · become anticipatory--Calloway Drive, for example · why do you need aCCidents before making streets 'safe? · construction yard--where is the $? · deterioration of existing infrastructure and non-existence of medians SummarY of Council, Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 20, 1993 Page 5 · lack of curbs & gutters · some have curbs but no gutters . · deterioration of alleys · avoid pitting one part of the city against another · why does one part of the city look "better" than others? · de-annexation · develop a selling proposal for islands--why do they not want to come into the city? · create incentive to join city · wrong ideas that annexing costs .new residents $ · licensing cats · review of downtown plan--is it always going to look like this? · are we .going to plant more trees? · why is Superintendent of Schools not in City Center yet? · review ordinances--are some outdated/oulxnoded? · review Charter addressing salaries of department heads · incentive to have employees live in the city · report on community reinvestment (the human factor and costs) Summary of CounCil Goal 'Setting Workshop Monday, July 26 1993 Page 6 ' · revisit council policies, · what role do appointees have on commissions? · interfere · emPloyee recognition · longevity · achievement · how can we make employees want to achieve? · televise council meetings · don't want to become prisoners of "media jockeys" · week.in retrospect,-you, too, could have' been part of this meeting · do people know what council does? · people don't know all' the things council does or has done · continue to address council "image" · public still holds previous image of council · people want leadership but are "incident-driven"' · council education program with students · people still think that rocking the boat gets results Summary of Council Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 26, 1993 Page 7 · closing of landfill.-what do.we get out of it? We should get more use out of it. Other 'cities have created parks. · this council can laugh at itSelf · celebrate! · bang our drum' · thrOw dirt Out · put timelines on goals and communicate them · put timelines on eve .rything how much do we want to.subsidize arts/cultural 'activities? · "tangible-izing" services · council subsidies to culture should be matched by private sources · why don't we ask for private $ prior to cutting programs/services? · dollar values for each service provide superior service vs. County service levels · are we going to grow? · if no, how to stop? .. · do we want to stop? Summary of Council Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 26, 1'993 Page 8 ~ · if yes, how to shape' it? · for whose benefit do you grow? · keep "good" restaurants · how to make existing businesses "feel good"? · (retention) · (invOlve local businesses) · synchronization of traffic signals · transportation · high speed rail · intermodal · light rail (moving rapidly) · plan for high speed rail · annual lobbying-effort with state--they can come to us. · invite state to bi-weekly council workshops · analyze/review TEAM BAKERSFIELD concept (it appears to be successful) · use TEAM BAKERSFIELD concept for retention ' · reduce duplication of services Summary of Council Goal Setting Workshop Monday, July 26, 1993 Page 9 · use media to show how we can eliminate duplication · people don,t care about a "mini-city" growing west of Bakersfield (don't understand why tlxis affects them) · city is supporting county services. · what is the tree cost of services? · Supervisors won't change · recycling mandates · wastewater plant expansion · downtown development/Baker Street relative to URM · utilize surveys--dust them off · it's only worthless if you. don't ask the fight questions / BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM . Jul~93 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ?// ~ FROM: Ed W. Schulz, Public Works Dxrector ; SUBJECT: Council Referral #12024. RR Xing Repair @ East California Avenue between Williams Street and Washington Street. COUNCIL WARD: 1 Staff has investigated the subject complaint, visited the site and gathered information from the Street Maintenance Division and determined that the crossing is obviously in need of maintenance or repair. Southern Pacific Transportation Company is the owner and maintainer of the crossing and tracks. A letter (copy attached) has been written to the Southern Pacific Transportation Company requesting immediate attention to the needed repair of the crossing. A copy of the letter was also sent to the Public Utilities ~ommission since repair of crossings is a continuing problem in this area. If no response is received and/or no repair is evident in a reasonable period of time, we will make further contact with the railroad and the P.U.C. b: \RR_XING .~IEM BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93301 ~805) 326-3724 ED W. SCHULZ. DIRECTOR · CITY ENGINEER ., July 21, 1993 ' Mr. T. O. Hyatt, Dist. rict Engineer Southern Pacific Transportation Company P.O. Box 3036 Bakersfield, Ca 93385 RE: POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS CONDITION OF R.R. XING No. BT314.15 Dear Mr. Hyatt: We have a serious concern regarding a railroad crossing under your maintenance. Our information describes the crossing as Number BT314.15, located at the boundary of the City of Bakersfield city limits crossing East California Avenue between Williams Street and Washington Street. The overall condition of the crossing has created a potentially hazardous condition to vehicles of all types using East California and crossing the tracks. We receive numerous complaints from the public requesting that the crossing be repaired. We ask that you 'expedite repair of the crossing. Thank you for your help in this matter. Please contact Mr. Mark Leal,~ Street Maintenance Superintendent at 326-3111 or Stephen Walker, Traffic Engineer at 326-3959, if you have questions. Very truly yours, E. W. Schulz, Public Works Director Stephen L. Walker, Traffic.Engineer cc: Fred Kloepper, Asst. Pub. Works Dir. Mark Leal, Streets Maint. Supt. Stephen Walker, Traffic Engineer · City Council Referral No. 12024 Mr. Art Aldridge, Public Utilities/ Commission CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL MEETING OF: 07/07/93 REFERRED TO: PUBLIC WORKS E SCHULZ ITEM: RECORD# 12024 ReDair of SoUthern Pacific Railroad Crossing on East California Avenue. ACTION TAKEN BY cOuNCIL: COUNCILMEMBER EDWARDS REFERRED TO STAFF A PREVIOUS REQUEST REGARDING'REPAIR OF THE SOUTHER PACIFIC RAILROAD CROSSING,ON EAST CALIFORNIA' AVENUE. BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED' NO DATE FORWARDED BY CITY CLERK: 07/13/93 RESPOND BY: 07/27/93 (CM) NOTE' STATUS CHANGES ARE'TO BE ENTERED FOR EACH REFERRAL AT LEAST ONCE A'MONTH EVEN IF NO ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN! JUL 1 6 1993 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT' E ORAHDUM TO: Jack Hardisty, Planning Director ~~ ~ FROM: Jack Leonard, Asst. Building Director DATE: July 30, 1993 SUBJECT: Building Department Policy Regarding Stop Work Orders The Building Department rarely exercises the use of a stop work order. It is usually issued only in extreme cases involving a contractor's (or owner's) blatant refusal to comply with code requirements. A stop work order in this case would be issued by the area Supervisor. Building Inspectors are given authority to issue stop work orders, but are generally restricted to those involving work performed without obtaining a proper permit. It is important to stop work immediately if a permit has not been obtained. This is to prevent the potential for improper construction which could lead to costly modifications. If an Inspector issues a stop work order, they are required to report the order to their Supervisor (and generally do by radio prior to issuance). The Building Department respects the financial burden imposed to the owner (or builder) in the use of stop work orders, and uses them in only extreme, well documented cases. Stop work orders clearly define the specific Municipal or Building Code violation. If there is a problem, our staff is available to,the public to review, discuss, .or interpret the requirement in question. I have polled mY Supervisory and Inspection staff and within the last 12 months they estimate approximately 4 to 5 stop work orders were issued related to "refused to comply" and numerous stop work orders were issued related to "work without permit". If you need additional information, or if there is a specific stop work order in question, please contact me at Ext. 3790. cc: Dennis Fidler, Building Director JL/kg/swo FY 1993-94 Adopted Budget Council Contingency 30-Jul-93 09:19 AM Salary Settlments 599,753 (3%) Pending Negotiations in December Effective Contingency* 578,477 See note below Golden Handshakes 100,000 Estimate Unemploymentlnsurance** 50,000 Estimate Total Council Contigency 1,328,230 Adopted Budget Notes: * Effective Contigency - Reflects 0.46% of General Fund appropriations plus approximately $264,000 to mitigate the impact of possible State or County action later in the year. (See Alan Tandy's June 10th memo to Council). ** Unemployment Insurance - originally intended for costs associated with proposed layoffs. As the number of proposed layoffs were reduced in the Adopted budget, these funds could be used for retirement costs associated with Golden Handshakes or to mitigate the impact of possible State or County action later in the year. mad\94bud\misc\cnclcont.wk1 Page 1 DRAFT REPORT ONNEED FOR UNIVERSAL COLLECTION and SEPARATE GREEN WASTE COLLECTION WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2700 "M" $~rect, Suite 500 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Daphne H. Washington, Director August 10, 1993 Printed on Recycled Paper REPORT ON NEED FOR UNIVERSAL COL?F~CTION and SEPARATE GREEN WASTE COLLECTION- INTRODUCTION As Kern County moves forward with the planning to meet the waste diversion goals, the waste management department continues to do so within the framework of the waste diVersion hierarchy approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 1992. The hierarchy establishes a commitment to focus on the most cost-effective programs fa-st, before expanding into the more costly diversion options,. ~: . Thc hierarchy established greenwaste.as, thc logical, first target for ~diversion due to volume of material available for diversion, as well as its cost-effectivencss~ In~,orderto successfully divert greenWaste from the waste stream for other uses, it will be necessary to: capture as much of the greenwaste as is practical, as well as separate it from the rest of the municipal solid waste stream Related to the nced to capture as much of the waste stream as practical, is the issue of efficiency of collection. To the .extent that collection efficiency can. bee enhanced, it provides the 'opportunity for cost savings to the rate payer, either in the form of' aVOided cost increases or the provision of containers for wasl~ collection. Efficiency in collection can best be ~achieved through universal collection in those areas of the community whereit is practical and reasonable; Universal collection makes sense for other reasons as well.which~are discussed in the report. This report addresses two major issues: universal collection~as well as separate greenwaste collection. The report identifies' the benefits as well as challenges associated with these .two activities, and makes recommendations for a pilot phase of separate green waste collection as well as further detail development of an implementation plan that will identify the method and costs of implementing universal collection and expansion of the pilot green waste program. UNIVERSAL COLLECTION Universal garbage collection is a program that would require all residents in a defined area to pay for a minimum level of garbage'collection service. Universal garbage collection would require Kern County's franchised refuse haulers to collect garbage from every residence in-a defined area. Kern County would bill residents in the defined area for the minimum garbage collection ' . 'service along with the property tax bill. Kern County would pay the franchised garbage haulers · for providing the minimum service. 1 WHERE UNIVERSAL COLLECTION MAY BE APPROPRIATE ,.. :~' ~' Kern-County has neverimP°sed universal garbage colleCtion: ~ However,. almost,every'city in Kern' County has imposed some form of universal collection to reduce illegal dumPing,, decrease garbage stockpiling, increase efficiency of garbage collection .and 'to spread the-cost of garbage collection as' equitably as possible. Generally, universal collection has given cities,, better control 'of their waste, streams and these cities are well positioned to move toward alternate day collection of green~ waste. Green waste collection programs and waste stream flow control are important elements in-most city's plans tO reach the waste diversion goals mandated by AB-939 (1989). Much of the County is remote and rural. Typically, residents in remote rural areas have little choice but to haul their, own. garbage. The remote rural areas are ,always within franchise hauler permit areas. Universal collection in franchise permit areas would not be practical 'or cost effective at this time. More accessible and populated rural areas are within franchise hauler franchise areas. All residents within a franchise area may receive garbage service. However, residents in County. rural areas .within the franchise areas must pay special rates that take into aCcount the distance and higher costs associated with providing garbage service in their rural area. Many .residents in these rural areas prefer to haul their own g~rbage to landfills and wansfer stations because, they contend they can do so cheaper than a garbage collection service or feel it is more convenient. The rural areas of the franchise areas are not well suited for universal collection either. - All urbanized unincorporated areas are within franchise hauler areas and arc served by a franchise garbage hauler at'a rate established by the Board of Supervisors. However, in unincorporated areas, residents have thc option of paying for garbage collection services or hauling their own refuse to a landf'fll or wansfer station. Garbage collection in urbanized unincorporated areas is very cost effective.' In urbanized areas, it 'is almost always cheaper for residents to pay for garbage service than to haul their own refuse. These urbanized areas are well suited for universal garbage collection. 2 Unfortunately, sOme. County...residents do not use a garbage colleCtion service and they. do, not self haul to~.the, hndfill either., These. residents avoid.all, costs-,for ~waste~diSposal;~.through,'fflegal:, dumping.'.'. Illegal. dumping.:is-especially evident in urbanized. :unincorporated~;,areas~that.~are~ surrounded or adjoin cities where universal collection occurs.: In_ urbanized' areas+ neighboring, trash cans and businesses with garbage service are close at hand and provide a convenient. opportunity for illegal, du_mping..', to conveniently dispose, of theirgarbage by dumping, it. into' a neighbors. WaSh can, a commercial bin, a city bin, bins.at a City or,~County park, . public campgrounds, canal banks and vacant lots .... Illegal dumping in bins increases disposal costs for those that do'Pay for garbage service. Some businesses have reported that their bins fill up so quickly with illegally dumped.waste.that they must pay for. more frequent collection or larger, bins than would otherwise be necessary. Many businesses have expressed concern that they must pay the new gate' fee. for waste that was. illegally dumped in their bins. Residents also pay higher garbage collection rates than would be necessary if universal collection is implcmcnte& When illegal dumping occurs on a Vacant lot or other property, the cost of disposal or Cleanup is almost always 'paid by a landowner or business, not by the person responsible for the indiscriminate illegal dumping. City residents are not the only victims-because County residents and businesses that have garbage collection service 'are just as likely to be victims of illegal dumping.. .. Illegal dumping pwblcms are not limited to single family residences. In many cases, owners of multi-unit rental pwperty do not provide garbage service and the renters are unwilling to pay for it,themselves. The renters then dump their waste in neighboring wash bins or on vacant property.. The Environmental Health Services Department receives over two thousand illegal dumping complaints per-year and the City of Bakersfield receives OVer one thousand, illegal .dumping complaints per year.. How many of these complaints would be eliminated by universal, garbage collection is difficult to measure. However, relatively few illegal dumping complaints are from areas with universal collection, if the area is not bordered by an area without universal collection. According to the Environmental/Health Services Department, over 30% of all illegal dumping complaints received Over the l~t two years originated in eight census tracts, all of which are in urban areas with a population density of over 500 people per square mile. THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH A lack of garbage service~ coupled with an inability to wanspon waste to a landfill and illegal dumping, sometimes leads to stockpiling of garbage. As can be expected, stockpiling garbage leads to unhealthy conditions. A high percentage of complaints about rats,, roaches, flies and " 3 other-disose .vectors originate in' .urbanized unincorporated:areas Without. Uni ? 611 n;': whe g ab:' h t n' stockva garbage and'the'resulting Public health concern is a significant issue in .thc same':~eii~U~ 'traCt~ that generate the majority' of'complaints~- ' · POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF UNIVERSAL COLLECTION Since a universal collection program would provide a minimumievel of garbage service to every occupied dwelling in a given area, residents in that area would have a convenient' Way to dispose of their normal household trash. (The recommended minimum service level'will be determined in a later study.) The incentive-· for illegal dumping and unhealthy stockpiling of residential garbage would be greatly reduced. Odor, vectors and hazards would all be-reduced. If. the' universal collection program included collection events for large residential items--such as mattresses, furniture and large tree trimmings, the incentive for illegal du__mping would be virtually eliminated. Any universal COllection Program would be more efficient and economical for-the unincorporated- community than the current system. Currently garbage trucks drive through some neighborhoods and only collect from every other dwelling. It is assumed that the residents' of'~the other' dwellings in those neighborhoods haul their garbage to the landfill. TO the extent they do, they 'are burning more fuel, creating more air pollution, creating more traffic on the roads 'and~at the landfill, and using more man~hours than would be the case if the garbage track that serves that neighborhood had collected all the garbage and taken it to the landfill in the.first place~:- IfSome- of the residents not on garbage service are dumping illegally, they are adding even more to the COSL A universal collection program would be more' fair and equitable ~for~unincorporated .urbanized areas. The residents that illegally dump in others garbage bins avoid the. ha~dlng cost while residents that do pay for garbage service are paying to haul more than their own garbage. Having everyone pay their fair share for-waste collection may reduce the cost per resident. Billing residents for garbage, collection is a significant expense for franchise haulers:i Under a universal collection program, garbage collection charges could be added to the County's property tax bill, thus reducing the franchise haulers cost of billing and reducing the cost per resident. Any savings generated by the efficiencies mentioned above could be used to partially offset 'the cost of waste diversion programs or to forestall future garbage collection rate increases. Savings could be used to offse~ the cost of garbage cans and green waste carts that would be. needed in a grin waste collection pwgram. Universal collection would enhance the possibilities for implementing waste diversion programs ' and separation of waste before it reaches the landfill. This could lead to enhanced resource recovery and recycling, allowing the County .to respond better to ,existing and possible future 4 waste man, agement .laws. ~For example, .universal.,coHectio~,~would,.,make~ gree~~t, ollection~ and diversion.more'efficient., F~rst, umversal co ecuo oUld~teefull~p~palion re.the? gree~ n.waste, collecuon ana mvemon program. ~econa, savangs universal collection could be used to purchase green residents without additional cost.' Universal collection also promotes efficiency in waste diversion projects such as material recovery facilities, by creating a steady and predictable waste stream. ff carts are provided as.a part of the universal collection program' it'willb~ possibl6'f6r ~chise haulers to upgrade their equipment to provide semi-antomated~curbside:.coll~on. Semi-. automated collection is more safe and.efficient than hand handling Of garbage,.cans.,Carts are. far sUperior to traditional garbage~cans because carts .are water proof, animal,:proof,:fly proof, easily wheeled to the curb 'and control litter. Most residents .that .use the' carts, needed for. semiautomated, collection, find that'the carts are more convenient., and safe~:t~O,,.uSe~,than,. conventional garbage cans. . .. . Since universal collection will reduce the number of trips t~iten to landfills by residents, there will be less traffic and congestion at landfills and transfer stations. Less residential Iraffic at' landfills and.transfer stations will increase safety because public.exposure to heavy.equipment and poor road conditions at these facilities will be decreased. ~ In this way, univerSal:collection will reduce the potential for liability Claims against the County. Fewer small residential loads will make lanclffll oL~tions more.efficient, It is easier for landfill operators to manage a relatively small number of large comm.er~al 10ads.than.a?rgenumber. Many cities feel they vicam a illegal aumping :a se' the universal garbage collection program in place. If the County adopts a universal, collection. progran~ County City relations may be improved. ..... :?...:_::,,.. ..... A MIN~ UNIVERSAL COLLECTION PROGRAM FOR RESIDENTIAL,PROPERTY A minimum universal collection program could require all residents to pay for-and,receive a minimum level of garbage collection service, ff their dwelling is in an area that meets the 1) The area must be served by a franchise hauler .... 2) The area must have a minimum population density of 500 people' per. square mile. It should be a 'priority to impose universal collection in urbanized .County islands or.County urbanized areas adjacent m incorporated cities that already have universal collection...Prod, priority' should be given to County urbanized areas where a lack.of proper garbagedisposal has been id~nlified as'a.., public health. Problem .~; ',...~ . . ~. - .~ ...... -,~.':~; ~,...~.. ,.-, - ~.; . - A study should be conduc~,xi to dem'mine what the minimum level of Urdversal service should be,. When studying-the minimum level, consideration, should ~be~ given- to ~he .amount.of waste being gcn~ated by a dwelling and thc cost of collection. To discourage illegal dumpin§ and stockpiling of garbage, each dwelling must have the size and number .of containers .that are necessary to hold all the waste that is being generated there. To avoid unnecessary economic impact, residents should not be required to pay for more service than they need..~ Currently, the County's franchise haulers provide a variety of special services thai may include yard cleanup, walk-in service, 'exua cans or cxua pickups. Under thc minimum universal collection program, the County could opt tO'require residents that prefer special services to make arrangements directly with the garbage hauler for that .area or the County could streamline the current system' and reduce the number of "special services" by including a 'greater Variety of service options in the minimum' service level. These issues should be included in the study of' minimum service levels described above. " The County should bill for minimum universal service by adding a charge to the property tax bill The charge would only be billed to owners of improved residential property, located in a universal collection'area. The County would then pay the .franchised haulers to provide the minimum service to all occupied dwellings in the universal, collection areas that were billed by the County. This billing method is the most cost effective and insures payment, reduces bad debt and makes an elaborate bad debt collection system unnecessary. The Department has. conferred with staff from the Auditor/Conuoller's office and has determined that the County's automated property tax billing system will accommodate billing for universal collection, without costly modification. However, this billing methOd would require additional County staff time to prepare the property tax bills. .. COLLECTION EVENTS. To further reduce illegal dumping, the minimum universal collection program should include semi-annual events to collect large items that can not fit into normal garbage cans or bins. By collecting large items such as furniture and appliances, illegal dumping would be further reduced. Roll off containers could be used for this purpose and since the mil offs .would contain residential waste, the gate fee would be waived. The cost of such a pmgr~_m_ could be included in the rates for mirdmum universal service. UNIVERSAL COLLECTION FOR NON.RESIDENTIAL LAND USES Some businesses and industries do illegally dump their waste in thc same manner as residents. However, a very small percent of illegal dumping complaints alleged that a business was responsible for the illegal dumping. Also, the franchise haulers report' that the vast majority of 6 bUSinesses and industries:already 'con~:~ifor garbage:collection:services: ::.Therefor~;jncluding~ commercial and industrial waste generators (non-residential improved.,parcels)vin~the~ufiiversal,~ collection program would be of limited benefit. · Due Io the gr~t v~e~'of non-residcnlial.landuses,'the amountof waste generatedon any given non-residential parcel is extremely -variable. ::: This 'variability makes, it..diffi~ult~:to:cstablish miinimum service levels for non-residential parcels., . - Businesses on garbage service pay' ga~e fees based on thesize andnumber:ofbins~heyuse:.and: the number of limes their bins are collected. Because of gate fees, businesses are encouraged to' reduce the amount'of waste, they generate. As they reduce,;their::waste;?businesses:requlre; smaller bins and bins are-collected less frequently. To :re.in: this.flexibility, a:~universal: collection program for non-residential~parcels would need a monh'fly billing;~system:::~ The franchised garbage haulers would prefer to have the County'be:responsible:for~billlng~ and.. ,collecting feesfor universal collection orbe compensated for those bills that are not collectable..~ If the County were to accept responsibility for billing and collecting fees for universal collection, it would be necessary to esIablish a new monfltly billing system-just for non-residentialparcels. ~ This would be a cosily alternative and would require a greaI deal of coordination with the haulers. When billing for universal collection is done monthly and the bill is seperale from waier or sewer services, it is more difficult to collect the debt than when charges are,added to .the:,~tax - bill. If the-County did:the billing for comercial mandatory collection, it would i:xperience~ a relatively high percenl~ge of bad debt.. The City of Bakersfield, whichhas Circums~nces:s'unilar~. to what the County would face, has experienced about 4.5 percent bad:debt in.-Rs: ~commercial: ' universal collectionprogran~ · Likewise, the City of Arvin has rePorted that as. many, as 20% of. the- businesses tha~ should be paying for universal garbage coilection,~refuse lo pay their;bills. If the County were to require the franchised garbage haulers to perform the billing.and Collection function, the haulers would be justified to request compensation for any bad debt thai might result. Due to the reasons cited above~,.universl collection is not recommended for'commercial..was~ generaIors at this time. The Deparlment will continue to study the issue and may recommend a universal collection program in the future, if conditions warrant. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve the "minimum universal garbage collection" cOncept for all dwellings within selected urbanized areas and direct thc _-Waste · Management Department to prepare a detailed implementation plan within 6 months, -, with the assistance of a firm experienced in collection processes and equipment ? A list of unincorporated urbanized areas that would benefit from universal collection. A discussion of how universal service relates, to waste diversion pmgramsi~i.. ,:.'.~'i ~..' ~-!~i~. - A description of the minimum universal service that will be,provided and.a discuSSion, of how residents may obtain special .services not included in the minimum level. A cost analysis of the effect of universal collection on garbage hauling_rates. A projection of rates that will be Charged for minimum universal service,_ A discussion of how minimum universal service will be billed. A list of tasks that must be completed and resources needed 'to refine and implement the plan. A budget for plan implementation, monitoring and final revisions that might be required. A schedule to begin universal collection by July 1,, 1994 It is recommended that universal collection not be implemented in rural areas with a population density of less than 500 people per square mile. CURBSIDE COLLECTION OF GREENWASTE - PHASE I Kern County has identified in the Waste Diversion Plan - Implementing a Countywide Strategy, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 15, 1992, that is reasonable to target greenwaste and woodwaste as a primary wastestream to divert toward meeting'its 25% goal by · 1995. Greenwaste and woodwaste, similar in composition, are a leading contributor to the wastestream .and make up 29% (198,997 tons/year) of the Metro area total wastestream. Compared to other types of waste, this particular waste type can be effectively and economically diverted in such ways as mulching, composting, and fuel for energy. Diverting any waste type requires eventual separation for processing and marketing. The amount of recoverable material depends upon separation and educational techniques.. Typically, the percentage of recoverable waste increases over time. However, even .with superior separation techniques, a fraction of the targeted waste type will still be-contained within the wastestream and disposed. '~ In order to successfully divert greenwaste out of the wastestream, a change in thc method of collection is necessary. Presently, greenwaste is cO'mingled with municipal solid waste (MSW) and collected from residences twice per week as mandated by local ordinance. All co-mirlgled waste is sent to the landfill for disPOsal; however, opPOrtuni.ti~s. ~a~....:~ .utf~... _'.mg ~ .us~.~,of~clean; separnted greenwas~e. This POints to the need for a change-in .the~',oHection me~t~0d.: PROBLEM STATEMENT ' ~'-': -=~:= ..~,,.~ ~ G-reenwastegenerated~ by households.in the unincorporated, nrea of-Kern.County i.s. _p!'e....sently co- mingled and discarded with other MSW. ~Coilection of co-miugled~MSW=occurs~twice~;~eekly. This results in a large volume of greenwaste unsuitable for diversion due to contaminntion. A central issue for,all recycling programs is the trade off between~collection easeand~ .contamination concerns. Potential contaminntion in the compost range from.tennis:balls:and:broken .lawn ' furniture' found in yard waste collection programs, to the various sundry household bn~nrdous wastes found, in MSW. Even inert' materials, such as glass.~orplastic debriS,~can?~seriously compromise the eventual marketabi, lity of the final greenwaste product. Insuring the production o£ a high-quality, marketable.product is critical to a successful greenwaste, program.:= Without markets, contaminated greenwaste may eventually end up in a landfall. NEEDS STATEMENT To maximize the opPOrtunity to obtain clean greenwaste for diversion projects.~..~. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS Kern County Waste Management Department staff have eValuated a nmnber of proPOses that the following initial assumptions be applied, to.,,developing ~a gree. nwaste 1. ' Greenwaste shall be segregated prior to collection rather,than:separated following.. collection to minimize contamination ..- and~ maximize ~-marketability;.~. of :'- the=. . greenwaste product. .' ,-. .- 2. Curbside collection of greenwaste will improve participatiOn 'and.leffici~cy of collection -, .... 3. Slmcially designed greenWaste receptacles shall.be :.utilized in order.to :promote: ventilation, maintaining the greenwaste in an aerobic state while:assuring..ad~uate. segregation and minimizing contamination.. 4, Teams involved in developing aCounty Uninc~ted Area Greenwaste Program will have the following roles: ' · a. Franchise' Haulers will be utilized .to implement the cUrbside greenwaste collection. 9 b.~ ~., City of Bakersfield will be responsible for greenwaste processing and. c, . Kern County will be responsible for public.educatiOn, data.Collection and project evaluation, as well as some financial obligation. Tho present twice-weekly MSW collection schedule shall be modified to weekly greenwaste Collection and weekly MSW collection.. · IMPLEMENTATION Greenwaste is probably the least studied of all major components in the municipal wastestream oven though, in many communities, grcenwaste constitutes the largest single component in that wastestream. Prior to implementing a permanent greenwaste program, Kern County Waste Management Department wishes to conduct a phased program to identify and.quantify problems likely to be encountered and the attendant costs associated with Separate collection. Furthermore, it is'necessary to implement separate greenwaste collection on a phased schedule to identify potential mechanical or equipment barriers; to define the collection Season and material variation; to determine the optimum route sizing;~ and to quantify program volumes. To maximize the speed with which the phased program can be converted into a permanent program, if desired, a Request for Proposal (RFP) for greenwaste diversion can be issued concUrrent with the Phase 1 of the program. However, no conu'act for diversion will be entered into until Phase I"of the program is completed. · GOALS The goals of Phase I within the unincorporated areas of Kern County will be to: 1. Implement Separate collection of greenwaste. 2. Identify any environmental .or health proble_m_s associated with reducing-thc frequency~of MSW collection to once'per week. 3. Determine if the,carts, purchased for storing greenwaste for up to seven days, are effective in preventing decomposition and odor or fly nuisances. 4. Determine any special constraints associated with the placement and collection of greenwaste carts that may arise. 5.' Determine the cost of operating a separate greenwaste collection program.. '. 6. Document quantities and characteristics of greenwaste generated during peak spring .and summer months. -" 7..., .~-Develop,effective educational, tools..to, motivate, program participation while instructing participants of proper greenwaste protocol.~ DESCRIPTION OF PHASE I Identify Tm-net Routes - Prior to initiating Phase I, it will be necessary to identify the routes targeted for Phase I in conjunction with the haulers. The mutes must be selected to reflect the- demographic variations within the community, such as intensely urban versus rural versus suburban, older neighborhoods with mature' and vast vegetation versus newer tracts (older, larger -lots; presence of alleys; mobile-home parks; etc). " ,,,.Pre-Survey - Student help can be' utilized to canvas neighborhoods to identify disposal,.habits of residents on target routes. Public Education -.Student help can also be utilized to distribute information and"talk to. residents aboUt Phase I, and discuss any 'behavior changes that will be necessary' as a result Of thc Program. Residents with lawn services can be encouraged to have service utilize the curbside ' greenwaste collection. · Post Survey - Student help.can also be utilized to distribute and collect questionnaires or surveys to document the reaction and experience of participants to the greenwaste collection program. Evaluation - Compile information from participants, haulers and 'the City of Bakersfield to · determi,me relative merits, accomplishments potential improvements and a detailed implementation plan required to move program from a Phase I to permanent stares. The detailed implementation plan shall include the following: A list of unincorporated urbanized areas that would benefit from curbside greenwaste collection. ',' A discussion of how curbside greenwaste collection relates to waste diversion programs. A descriPtion of the potential diversion curbside greenwaste collection, will provide as established in Phase I. A cost analysis of the effect of curbside greenWaste collection on garbage hauling rates. 11 A cost analysis of thc' relationship of curbsidc greenwaste coUcction to automated and semi-automated collection on garbage hauling rates. A discussion of how curbsidc greenwaste collection will be billed. A list of tasks that must be completed and resources needed to refine and implement the plan. A budget for plan implementation, monitoring and f'mal revisions, that might be required. A schedule to expand curbsidc grecnwaste collection by july l, 1994. Identify curbsidc grccnwastc collection areas, insure areas arc consistent with existing garbage routes and tax rate areas, establish boundaries, prepare maps. Work with franchise haulers to determine the most effective service levels. Include discussion of automated service versus semi-automated service. Develop a public education program to gain acceptance of curbside greenwaste collection. RECOMMENDATIONS ~ It is recommended that your Board approve the implementation of the Phase I of the separate collection of grecnwaste program, and direct the Waste Management Department to develop a .proposed .implementation plan for expansion and present to your Board for approval. The Greenwaste Collection implementation plan will be developed in conjunction with., the implementation plan for mandatory collection with the assistance of a firm experienced'in colllection processes and equipment. RBB:NLE:nef:dlw LrNIV(X)Lo2