CC - 04-23-91• • APPROVED'
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING DAT ~~5
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 23, 1991 R1
The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to
order by Mayor Imperial at 8:05 p.m. in the council Chambers of City
Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilman McDonald..
The Invocation was delivered by Pastor Dennis Alexander of the
Church of the Nazarene.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmen Bruesch, McDonald, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem
Clark, and Mayor Imperial
Absent: None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: APRIL 10, 1991 - ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN McDONALD that
the Minutes of the Adjourned Regular Meeting of April 10, 1991, be
approved as submitted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: Taylor
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: APRIL 11, 1991 - ADJOURNED MEETING
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN McDONALD that
the Minutes of.the Adjourned Meeting of April 11, 1991, be approved as
submitted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
PRESENTATIONS:
A proclamation was presented by the Council to Bob Ogert, Field
Representative to Assemblywoman Sally Tanner, in recognition of his
years of service to the Rosemead community.
A second proclamation was presented by the Council to David
Acevedo, naming the week of May 5-11, 1991, as "Hire a Veteran Week."
A City plaque was presented by the Council to Planning Director
Gary Chicots, in honor of his service to the City. Mr. Chicots has
taken a position with the City of Lawndale.
I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
A. Holly Knapp, 8347 E. Whitmore Street, reported that plans for
the 4th of July parade are proceeding.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE CONDITIONS
IMPOSED BY A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING A REQUEST
FROM JAE HA CHO FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN ORDER TO
TRANSFER AN EXISTING OFF-SALE BEER AND WINE LICENSE IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A RETAIL MARKET LOCATED AT 3200 DEL MAR
AVENUE, ROSEMEAD, dba ALBA'S MARKET (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 10,
1991)
CC 4-23-91
Page #1
0 •
At the request of the applicant, the public hearing was closed and
this item was removed from the agenda.
B. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE NO. 680 FOR A REZONING
OF CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD), MEDIUM COMMERCIAL (C-3),
PARKING (P), AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL (M-1)
PROPERTY EASTERLY OF IVAR AVENUE EASTWARD TO THE EASTERLY
CITY LIMITS OF ROSEMEAD BY ADDING A DESIGN OVERLAY (D)
DESIGNATION - CONTINUED FROM MARCH 12, 1991 and
A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A CITY-INITIATED REQUEST TO
AMEND THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO EXEMPT CERTAIN ADDITIONS
TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL
STRUCTURES FROM THE DESIGN OVERLAY (D) REQUIREMENTS
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
A. Robert Angles, 9027 Rosemead Boulevard, stated that he no
longer opposed the proposed design overlay.
B. Ken Pike, 9142 Valley Boulevard, requested the definition of
the design overlay.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
The following ordinances were presented to the Council for
introduction:
ORDINANCE NO. 680
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM C-3, CBD, P, AND M-1 TO C-3D,
CBD-D, P-D, AND M-1D FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON VALLEY BOULEVARD
BETWEEN IVAR AVENUE AND THE EASTERN CITY LIMIT (ZC 90-180)
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MCDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that
Ordinance No. 680 be introduced on its first reading and that reading
in full be waived. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: Taylor
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered
Councilman Taylor stated the reasons for his vote as follows:
"My NO vote was primarily because this particular D Overlay is for
every single property on Valley Boulevard north and south and I had
brought up a motion that it be limited to... in excess of 20,000 square
feet. In the past there have been discretionary action by staff, and
not wrongful actions but discretionary, and I as I stated at the
meeting previously there is not one aspect of the property that is not
now subject to review under this. We do have our zoning ordinances,
we have the parking requirements as Mr. Chicots referred to so to me
this is total control right down to the paint on your building. So,
that's my objection and I'd like that in the minutes, verbatim."
Councilman Bruesch stated the reasons for his vote as follows:
"The reason I voted for this is because there's been a general comment
from the public that there needs to be some control over what is being
put in along our major arteries and I think this is a very important,
minor but important, step in assuring that the public knows that this
City is going to make sure that what is proposed and what is built
along our major arteries will be compatible with the rest of the
neighborhood." .
CC 4-23-91
Page 12
• •
The following ordinance was presented to the Council for
introduction:
ORDINANCE NO. 684
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING EXEMPTIONS FOR CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS TO BUILDINGS LOCATED IN ZONES WITH A DESIGN (D)
OVERLAY
MOTION COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN McDONALD that
Ordinance No. 684 be introduced on its first reading and that reading
in full be waived. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: Taylor
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
C. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A CITY-INITIATED REQUEST TO
AMEND THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY DELETING POULTRY AND
RABBIT RAISING, SLAUGHTER, OR STORAGE AS PERMITTED USES IN
THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL (M-1) ZONES
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
A. Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, asked for clarification of
this ordinance.
There being no one else wishing to speak,.the public hearing was
closed.
The following ordinance was presented to the Council for
introduction:
ORDINANCE NO. 683
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
DELETING POULTRY AND RABBIT RAISING, SLAUGHTER OR STORAGE AS
PERMITTED USES IN THE M-1 ZONE
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MCDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that
Ordinance No. 683 be introduced on its first reading and that reading
in full be waived. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
D. A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF THE
CITY'S SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT (SRRE)
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Tim Dezamura and Diane Nemeth, representatives of Charles Abbott
Associates and Gershman, Brickner, and Bratton, summarized this
report.
Councilman Bruesch questioned the curbside participation
percentages.
Councilman McDonald asked about the education and promotion
aspects of the plan.
Gene Boyd, no address given, questioned the population numbers
used to arrive at the tonnage projections. CC 4-23-91
Page #3
• •
There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
No action was required on this item at this time.
III. LEGISLATIVE
A. RESOLUTION NO. 91-21 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF
$357,387.87 NUMBERED 37322-37361 AND 33198 THROUGH 33341
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN McDONALD
that Resolution No. 91-21 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Bruesch requested clarification of Check No. 37325,
$8918.62, to the Department of Conservation for strong motion
instrumentation.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 686 - AMENDING THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE
REGARDING FIREWORKS - INTRODUCE
The following ordinance was presented to the Council for
introduction:
ORDINANCE NO. 686
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
AMENDING THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE SALE OF
FIREWORKS
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MCDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR that
Ordinance No. 686 be introduced on its first reading and that reading
in full be waived. Vote resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain:" None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Taylor asked about the insurance premiums.
Councilman Bruesch asked about the promised safety programs and
requested that only legitimate local organizations be allowed to sell
fireworks.
Mayor Imperial requested that the fireworks dealers pay for the
insurance and the charges for electrical hookups.
Tom Peters, Freedom Fireworks, stated that a safety program has
been established and that brochures will be available at all stands
and schools.
Mayor Pro Tem.Clark requested clarification of the age requirement
for those selling fireworks.
CC 4-23-91
Page #4
•
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR - RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL
CC-A AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND 1991 LEGISLATIVE SEMINAR ON
LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE IN SACRAMENTO, MAY 10, 1991
CC-B APPROVAL OF DANCE AND ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT FOR THE ROSE
ROOM, 8772 E. VALLEY BOULEVARD
CC-C REQUEST FROM TEMPLE STATION FOR USE OF CITY VAN FOR 1991
WESTERN REGIONAL EXPLORER CONFERENCE, MAY 31 THROUGH
JUNE 2, 1991
CC-D EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT WITH AMTECH FOR SPORTS LIGHTING
SERVICES
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that
the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote
resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION
A. CONSIDERATION OF TRASH COLLECTION FRANCHISE PROPOSALS
VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS:
FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER: This item was continued from the
meeting of April 10th at the request of the Council and we've attached
for you a comparison chart of the three firms.... I'm sorry, was
continued from April 10th. We delivered to you items additional
information from all the nine firms that submitted original proposals.
I think we tried to respond to all the questions that the Council was
kind enough to give us prior to the meeting. And as you know on
Friday we made a delivery from each company of some information and
direct answers to your questions. Some of the items covered that you
asked for were lawsuits pending against the firms and I believe the
formula that was to be used by each of the trash companies in this
city for the five-year contract and also the formula that is in
existence in each of their cities that they now serve. We provided
you with all the additional information that was requested.
IMPERIAL: I have at this time two requests to speak on this item from
persons in the audience. The first one would be Jim Donohoo, Modern
Service and the second person requesting was Glenn Reeder. So, Jim
would you come first and then Mr. Reeder come up second. Juan Nunez
didn't want to speak on that one...okay, II-C and V-A, all right. Mr.
Juan Nunez would follow Glenn Reeder and then Martin Siminoff..
MODERN: My name is Jim Donohoo, I'm an independent CPA representing
Modern Service Company. There's just a few things I'd like to
clarify. They may have been clarified, that's why I was going to go
last so I'm not redundant. I wasn't here at the last meeting because
I had another commitment but I understand that it was brought out that
modern service is now getting $12.78 a month for residential pickup.
I want to make it clear that's not correct information. It's a little
over $10 which I think when you look around the area that's pretty
similar to what's going on in the rest of the area. One of the
companies I understand proposed that they would give the city some
money back based on roughly 3 million dollars of revenues. For
everyone's information the revenues from the City of Rosemead are
approximately $2.5-2.6 million and under the new contract it would be
less than that. In breaking down for example one company has
suggested they would provide $92,000 over a five-year period. I
realize that looks like an astronomical figure but when you break
CC 4-23-91
Page #5
MODERN CONTINUES: it down it comes out to about based on residential
pickups $.07 - $.08 a household a month. And we would like that to be
looked at when the rate comparisons are looked at. As I understand it
looking at all the proposals that were furnished to everybody Modern
Service is the lowest bid. Being here myself at Council meetings in
the past I've heard no one say that our service was bad. In fact I've
heard the contrary. We would hope that on the basis whatever decision
is made we hope we would know what basis that was. It is my
understanding that the first meeting we came to which was not a
Council meeting that it would be broken down to three or four
companies or somewhere in there and then those companies would be
called in and presentations discussed. And maybe that's something
that will happen in the future. I don't know. So far, we haven't been
called in. I'd like to clarify another comment which was brought out
at I think at the last Council meeting. I may be incorrect about the
date but I think that's when it was that Modern Service gets about a
million dollars a year in subsidies. I think very strongly it should
be pointed out that in the last contract negotiations Modern Service
was asking for a cost of living increase and those who were
responsible in the City at that time suggested no, we don't want to do
that. We will cut the cost of living increase 1% and we want to
subsidize the dump for-the residents. So, that wasn't a decision we
made however it turned out. Even subsequent to that Mr. Gregorian has
offered to renegotiate that but nobody accepted that offer. And not
to be antagonistic at all but I think it's unfair to present that
picture to the people when they don't really understand what went on
behind it. I would hope that before a decision is made that all the
information is really understood by all the Councilmen. I do not envy
Don (referring to Assistant City Manager, Don Wagner and people who
work with him going through all those contracts because they were
presented differently. The information's not identical, just
something you can carbon copy, so it was not an easy process.
Finally, Mr. Mayor, again not to be antagonistic, but knowing your
feelings about Modern Service I respectfully request that you not be
involved in the process of selecting a contractor. And that's all I
have to say unless there's any questions anybody has.
IMPERIAL: I resent that item. I might not like you, my friend but I
can certainly realize I have to deal with you, okay? In one way or
another and I'll do that very professionally. I resent that item and
I don't think you have any right to take my right to vote away from me
when you were not the one that gave it to me, it was the people of the
city.
MODERN: I understand.
IMPERIAL: Okay. I'm surprised that you even said that because as far
as I'm concerned that's about as non-professional as you can get.
Everyone's entitled to their feelings. This is a free country, okay?
Thank you very much.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Clarification from Mr. Donohoo. What did you say
the rate averages out for a residential?
MODERN: It's....I don't have it Mr. Taylor right in front of me but
I'll guess it's about $10.48. It's a little over $10 with the
subsidies.
TAYLOR: I agree and it was clarified during our last meeting as far
as the what was considered a subsidy is a payment by the city to help
pay the operating costs. In effect, the greatest portion of that, if
not all of it, was the pass-through for the dump charges for the
residential and the commercial. Tonight on our claims and demands we
had approximately $77,000 I believe, $34,000 residential and the
balance of it was for the commercial. But it's interesting. We have
a proposal here from Modern Service listed April 15, 1991, single
family dwelling residential curbside service 1989-$8.02; 1990-$8.05;
1991-$9.01 and you just made reference to $10.48.
MODERN: Yeah. My $10 is with all dump subsidies and all subsidies.
CC 4-23-91
Page #6
C~1
TAYLOR: Okay. Then what is this fee?
•
MODERN: This item here is the actual cost that the resident's charged
plus the city's subsidy for that resident's charge. The City's been
subsidized and I'd have to look at the billing but I think up until we
just changed I think it was three seventy something.
TAYLOR: Well, we were paying $15.76 a quarter so that would have been
what, $5.24~,a month and we just tacked another dollar on to it to help
start cutting that down so that made it $6.24 is approximately what
the current rate is today.
MODERN: That's right. That's what we bill the City residents.
TAYLOR: So, we get this figure at $9.01 and your getting more
realistic with the $10.48 so there's still quite a spread from $6.24
up to $10.48 but your proposal comes in on the original proposal as
being a monthly charge of $7.76. So, I have to admit that I'm at a
real loss to figure out how you're going to come back for the contract
and take that loss because starting this year the pass through doesn't
start until the contract goes into effect. So, until next July that's
a big chunk of money.
MODERN: That's correct and we considered that when we bid.
TAYLOR: Okay, we'll analyze a little further but I just wanted to
clarify some of the rates that we do have here.
MODERN: I think that you'll find others to be competitive in the
contract have also bid less than they may be charging in other cities.
TAYLOR: That's what we're going to find out and that's what contracts
are for and you know and I know lawsuits and they been threatened and
taken to court but we got to have a contract starting somewhere.
Thank you.
IMPERIAL: Any further questions? Just to clarify this, Mr. City
Attorney. Must I give up my vote because I have feelings with
somebody? I mean, is there anything that tells me I have to do that?
I wouldn't intend to do it anyhow but I want a legal interpretation.
ROBERT KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: No. Certainly based on what I've heard
this evening, there's no reason for you to ? yourself from this
matter.
IMPERIAL: Thank you. I feel safe
I have three people that want ...Mr
think you were next to speak.
now. Let's get on with the matter.
Donohoo, okay. Glenn Reeder, I
GLENN REEDER, 3413 N. EARLE AVENUE: I've lived at this address for 49
years and in the early days prior to incorporation the trash pickup in
that area was a disaster. We had trucks, trash cans on the streets
every day of the week and trash trucks running around the street every
day of the week. After incorporation it got a little better. After
the advent of Modern Service into that their contract, their exclusive
contract with the city, things got to a very normal and reasonable
pickup service. They have been very efficient and they have been very
timely. The fact is you can.... I've checked it the last 2 or 3 months
and you can practically set your watch for the time that they're going
to be there on the pickup day and as far as the cost is concerned I
think Gary (referring to Councilman Taylor) was right in the $6.24
paid by the residents subsidized by $2.00 by the city, that makes a
total of $8.24 and that is by some distance the lowest rate in the San
Gabriel valley and we are all very happy with that and we hope that
you will take that into your consideration when you consider this
contract. And I would just like to leave you with that age-old adage
and trite expression if it ain't broke don't fix it. Thank you.
IMPERIAL: Juan Nunez.
CC 4-23-91
Page #7
• •
JUAN NUNEZ, 2702 DEL MAR AVENUE: I just want to say that on your
contract with whoever's going to get the contract that they should not
have advance billing. I never get billed by the electric company or
the phone company until I have used their services. Another thing,
that they would maintain their trucks so they will not spill oil on
the streets as some of Modern Service trucks have been doing sometimes
that they don't repair their hydraulic systems. Maintain leak proof
bins at schools, restaurants, and markets and wash those bins at least
once a month to keep them from smelling. Have people, customers cover
their trash cans, send out notices to keep the trash cans from
spilling and on rainy days keeping the cans from getting wet and soggy
where the people that pick them up are too heavy to pickup and then
they just leave them there and sometimes the people don't bring them
into the yards. Report those cans or items that are left, that have
not been picked up to the foreman of the people that are working so
they can get a way to either come over and pick em up again or some
way of having the people bring them up from the street so they don't
remain there all week. Right now, there's a couch almost across from
where I live and it was left there last Saturday, or last Friday
rather, and it's still there. So, I don't know whether the people
that pickup this trash notify their foremans that they haven't picked
up a certain item so they can send a different truck to pick it up
because they cannot put it in their bin to be picked.
IMPERIAL: Juan, make sure Jeff (referring to Jeff Stewart, Executive
Assistant) gets that information, will you? Is that all? Martin
Siminoff.
MARTIN SIMINOFF, ZAKAROFF SERVICES: I'd just like to take this
opportunity to thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal
and I understand all the time that the Council and staff has put into
reviewing everything. I kind of like the presentation of your AB939
people. I feel that within our proposal you'll see many of the same
elements that they indicated must be addressed, we address. We have
an operating material recovery facility which I feel will assist in
your AB939 mandate. Additionally, with our rate increase proposal by
utilizing our facility I feel we can create a diversion of much
material that would go to the landfill and that would reflect on any
rate increases in the future. Thank you.
IMPERIAL: Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item? Mr.
Pike.
KEN PIKE, 9220 STEELE STREET: On listening to the various gentlemen
that spoke from the companies why they were talking about one bidding
apples and the other oranges and one thing and another and I just
wondered if you drew up exact specs and said that's what we're bidding
on then you could have it with no subsidies or no pies in the skies or
anything, everybody'd be bidding on the same thing. It looks to me
like that would be the preferable way to do it and that way why you
couldn't say well he's giving you this, and I'm giving you this and
you got to weigh em out. If you get a specs drawn out and say that's
what you're bidding on gentlemen well that would simplify it.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Pike. That's what we did. We set out the specs, Mr.
Pike. Now, if somebody wanted to go above and beyond the specs
there's nothing to preclude them from doing that. Incidentally, thank
you for coming. Ken Pike is a past mayor and councilman of Rosemead.
Anyone else wishing to speak on this item? Okay, we'll close it for
discussion. What's the pleasure of the Council?
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I'd like a consensus of the Council here to
limit it to speaking about those that we think are in the ball game
rather than talk about seven or eight companies and trying to jump
across this comparison to this. I don't care who makes the
recommendation but I'd kind of limit that discussion to the companies
that somebody here feels are in the ball park.
IMPERIAL: Okay. What's your pleasure, gentlemen?
CC 4-23-91
Page #8
• •
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I would agree with what Mr. McDonald is saying.
And unless anybody has any objections, I think the breakdown that we
had would be a good place to start, whether we pick the low three or
four. We have nine proposals and some of them have priced themselves
beyond. When you get a $1.50 or more a month services, basically
going to have to be the same by contract.
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. I would go along with the low three or four. We
had voluminous material. I mean this is just what we got since last
Friday and I have a box load out in my truck. And what Mr. Pike was
saying is true that a lot of things look good on paper but what is
going to be a given is another question and I think there's a lot
that's going to have to come out in the negotiation process with staff
and I have a couple of things later on that I'm going to suggest that
staff goes after. I'm sure that my colleagues on the Council here
also have specific things they want to be settled out within the
negotiation process. But as a starting grounds because we are really
under the gun. We have to come to some decision real quick, I'd go
along with whichever is the consensus of the Council, either the top
three or top four.
IMPERIAL: I'll entertain a request for reviewing the top three.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I would consider the Athens proposal, BFI
proposal, and Modern Service proposal.
BRUESCH: I'd add to that, Consolidated and that would be the fourth.
IMPERIAL: Do you agree with Consolidated, also?
TAYLOR: I don't in one sense because if you look at their monthly
rate of $8.99 then you go down to Cal-San, their rate is $8.96 a
month; Western Waste is $8.98 a month; and Zakaroff is down to $9.09
so.....
BRUESCH: Point of information, Mr. Mayor. What I did was added in
the cost of recycling on each of these things, on each of these bids
and going down that changes the figures from Athens, Athens would be
$8.89; Consolidated would be $8.99 because they have no cost; BFI is
$9.55; Metropolitan and so on. So that's why I added in Consolidated.
It's because I figured in the recycling cost, also.
TAYLOR: They didn't have a recycling cost but there was a built-in
fee of $92,000.
BRUESCH: No. That's what we're going to get back.
TAYLOR: How do we get it back unless they collect it? You don't get
something back unless they collect it, so they're going to give us
back and that's what's so deceiving. It doesn't fall out of the sky.
That $92,000 comes from somewhere.
IMPERIAL: Do we have a representative from Consolidated here? Would
you mind answering this question? Would you please give your name.
JOHN TILESIO, CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL: I can definitely address that
concern. There is not a fee placed on top of the regular rate
structure to provide for that $92,000 fund. It in fact I guess you
might say comes from our bottom line and is returned in good faith to
the City.
TAYLOR: Well, it had to come from somewhere. That's all I can say.
Whether you take it from another city and give it back to us, somebody
paid it.
McDONALD: Well, regardless, in the negotiations we can certainly tell
them to keep their $92,000 and reduce the residential fee by that
particular amount. I think we're getting into things I believe that
Consolidated is a contender and I would go along with Athens,
Consolidated, BFI and Modern Service if that's what you're preference
is. CC 4-23-91
Page #9
r~
BRUESCH: I'll go along with that.
IMPERIAL: Okay. So we have Athens, BFI, Modern Service and
Consolidated.
McDONALD: I agree with that.
IMPERIAL: Mayor Pro Tem Clark?
CLARK: I agree with that.
IMPERIAL: Okay. It seems to be the agreement then that we review the
four companies, Athens, BFI, Modern Service and Consolidated.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. Before we start I'd like to get another
consensus by the Council here. Is it our intent at this point to pick
someone this evening based on the information that we have or to get
to the point we've got someone we're going to negotiate with, taking
it on the paper value that we have? How does everybody feel about
that? Where are we going tonight?
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. I also have a question about that and I'd like
to direct it to staff. I'm looking at the time schedule. And I'm
saying well we do have to get something in terms of movement toward a
contract because we're looking at July 1st. How does staff deal with
the timeframe that we're dealing with right now? Could you give us
some direction?
TRIPEPI: I think Mr. Mayor and members of the City you received ...the
City Attorney and I had some discussions and I think you received a
memorandum from the City Attorney. If in fact you are going to have
discussions with four companies that obviously is going to prolong
negotiations and at that point in time I believe the City Attorney's
memo talked about or at least indirectly referred to an extension of
an existing contract because we're not sure if you can have an
agreement in place by July 1st.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I'd like a little more input on how broad these
negotiations can vary. Basically, it's the continuation of the normal
trash pickup that we have whichever or whoever the contractor may be.
It's pretty well the methods are set down, the hours of operation, the
fees are set down. As far as a franchise fee, that's debatable;
whether we will have it or not. The other three companies they had
included a franchise fee of 4%. You take that 4% off of the three low
and that's going to bring them down roughly $.35 per household so how
broad are going to carry it ? Are we looking for newer services
or what's going to make it a drawn out problem?
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I think we're looking for the lowest cost
possible to the City resident and it would be my recommendation that
there is no franchise fees whatsoever. That all that's turned around
and put on the residential cost savings and actually no money returned
to us at all. I'd really like to get out of the trash business
through the subsidy and just only license someone and tell them to do
it the way we've got it written down, here.
TAYLOR: That's one item we can get rid of right now. I have no
problem with that.
TRIPEPI: Just make a motion and get rid of it.
McDONALD: I move that we do away with residential franchise fees and
commercial fees and have those costs returned in savings on the
initial or the base rate of the resident and the commercial customer.
Do I hear a second?
BRUESCH: I'll second that.
IMPERIAL: It's been regularly moved and seconded. Any more comments?
Would you vote please.
CC 4-23-91
Page #10
Yes:
Bruesch,
No:
None
Absent:
None
Abstain:'
None
Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. In terms of what we just voted on again I'll
reiterate my strong commitment to on-going recycling programs within
the community, whether it be church organizations, scouts, or youth
organizations and again this is an aspect, a policy statement that
will come out in our negotiations but we have to build our change of
behavior on those programs that are already being promulgated within
our community. This is one reason I said when we had our presentation
here if there's kids in the family you won't have that much because
they'll be taking it to school. only if the schools are being
supported or the Boy Scouts or the Little League are being helped
along with the recycling programs.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I'd like to move along to another item. I
would like to have a consensus of the Council on a vote that we go
with what I believe is the easiest type of recycling, that would be
co-mingled.
TAYLOR: I'd agree with that.
BRUESCH: I'll second that.
McDONALD: I make it into terms of a motion.
BRUESCH: I'll second that.
IMPERIAL: Would you vote please.
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Since it is co-mingled I'd like to go with the
increase from the 18-gallon to one 32-gallon container.
BRUESCH: That's pretty big for old people.
TAYLOR: Well, then they wouldn't put it out as often.
BRUESCH: It's still pretty big for older people to take out unless
there's some way to help them get it out of their houses.
TAYLOR: Well, can we make that an alternate selection then? Either
an 18- or a 32- ?
TRIPEPI: Two 18s, one for green waste and one for the others.
KRESS: You.might want to leave that for.....
TRIPEPI: Just leave it for the discussion.
KRESS: We have general direction.
BRUESCH: We have again a policy statement. I'd go along with 32 if
they were wheel carts.
IMPERIAL: Before we get too much involved in this why don't we call
about a fifteen minute recess and let these companies involved.....
TAYLOR: We're on a roll, Mr. Mayor.
McDONALD: Let's get at some of the basics out of the way. I think
another thing and I are we going to give one individual company both
the commercial and the residential?
CC 4-23-91
Page #11
•
TAYLOR: I would prefer it that way. That's the way it was.....
TRIPEPI: Staff would recommend one contractor.
BRUESCH: To do everything, including recycling.
TRIPEPI: To do everything so we don't have to.....
McDONALD: So I would make the motion that we give the when we select
our contractor that he gets both commercial and residential.
BRUESCH: I'll second that.
IMPERIAL: It's been regularly moved and seconded. Any further
comment? Would you vote please.
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. As long as we're talking about policy statements
I've got two. One is I would like the in the negotiation process to
develop a policy which states right in black and white, in writing,
about illegal dumping and who pays for it, the pickup of these things.
I see. all the time furniture and like that left out in front of houses
and the homeowner says well it's not mine, somebody came by last night
and dumped it. We have got to develop a policy, a written policy,
that states what is done with this waste and who is going to pay for
it because it's not a no-cost item anymore in most of these contracts.
The second thing and I'm going to piggyback on something that Juan
said. I would like for us to get tight-fit and/or lined containers
for any bins in the City......
TAYLOR: Are you speaking commercial or residential?
BRUESCH: Commercial.
TAYLOR: Fine.
BRUESCH: ......which accepts food wastes.
TAYLOR: I agree.
BRUESCH: That would be a bottom line for me in dealing with
commercial pickup because Juan is right, some of these things, these
bins go on for two, three years with never being cleaned out, never
being cleaned out and the tight-fit is necessary to keep away flies,
odor and I've seen liners that even though it is a cost item that they
are a lot easier to clean than bins themselves. So, I'd like to make
a motion that in our negotiation process that we request either
tight-fitting bins or liners for those commercial establishments which
accept food wastes.
IMPERIAL: That should be for any bin not just commercial.
TAYLOR: I would agree but there is a maintenance problem involved
with that and it has been ongoing with certain businesses and I think
that's a policing type thing. Mr. Bruesch is right. We have that
already now but it isn't working.
BRUESCH: I disagree. We don't have tight fitting bins.
TAYLOR: We have that they must be steamcleaned and maintained.
IMPERIAL: That's part of the contract as I recall. Am I correct?
That's the way it's supposed to be but it hasn't been done and it
needs to be and we're not talking just commercial, we're talking
residential, too especially in apartment complexes where people throw
everything in there and these things get loaded with rodents and what
have you. CC 4-23-91
Page #12
BRUESCH: Again, I make my motion that that be part of the language in
the new contract.
IMPERIAL: For both commercial and residential?
BRUESCH: Yeah. Tight fitting and/or lined bins.
IMPERIAL: What's your pleasure gentlemen?
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I believe lined they do have plastic liners or
that's something that we'd have to see what's available from the
contractor. I think we can address that without a problem, Bob
(referring to Councilman Bruesch).
McDONALD: I don't think we need a...I think we can address that
already because it's in there in one respect we just need to figure
out how to 'figure out how we're going to do it.
BRUESCH: Again, it seems like it's the consensus so that staff is
directed into that direction.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I would entertain a fifteen minute break to let
the franchise people step out the door there and we take on V-B while
they're out there.
IMPERIAL: Now, Mr. McDonald you just told me you didn't want a break.
TAYLOR: We're on a roll, remember.
McDONALD: No, I think we got some.....
IMPERIAL: We'll break for fifteen minutes.
TRIPEPI: Do the four companies understand what the Council's doing?
They're breaking for fifteen minutes and asking the four companies to
go recompute your monthly rates based on the franchise fees being
eliminated and the community fund being eliminated. Come back in with
your new rates.
IMPERIAL: Okay. I would like to call the different companies, one at
a time, have them come up to me and explain the formula they're going
to use and we'll go from there, one at a time and Modern is our
existing franchise so we'll have Modern come up first, then we'll have
Athens, then BFI, and then Consolidated. Okay. So, we'll take Modern
first.
MODERN: If I understood the direction right we're supposed to please
correct me if I'm wrong we're supposed to take what we had originally
bid, take the franchise fees back out to get to a bottom rate. Is
that correct?
IMPERIAL: Um, hum. And you have to explain the formula you're going
to use.
MODERN: Fine. I did it two ways. I'm not sure if the direction as I
think I understood the direction is to also take away the franchise
fee from the commercial and lower the residential by that amount.
IMPERIAL: That was the intent of the Council.
MODERN: Okay.
TAYLOR: Excuse me. When you say take away from the commercial it
means take away all franchise fees and lower commercial and
residential.
MODERN: Okay, the lowering of commercial I'll be glad to do that.
TAYLOR: Well, I think that was our intent was to take those fees
right out and we lower the rates for everybody, not being selective.
CC 4-23-91
Page #13
9 9
MODERN: All right. Let me paraphrase then.....
IMPERIAL: Are you going to use the formula that you used to get this
rate?
MODERN: I'm going to tell you exactly, yeah.
BRUESCH: Does this include your recycling fee?
MODERN: Yes. At 1% for commercial, it amounts to about $750-$800 a
month if you took that off the commercial. At this point I'd have to
go back now and go to one day, two day, three day, four day, five day,
six day and in 20 minutes I can't do that and tell you what it is but
it's going to be insignificant, I can tell you that.
McDONALD: Right, $800 or $900.
MODERN: On the residential side, taking the rate of $7.76 for what
was bid, minus $.04 (said cents but might have meant percent) reduces
it $.31 and.....
BRUESCH: Excuse me. That does not include your.....
MODERN: No. I'm getting right to that. The $.50 at 4% would be
$.02. I'm trying to give you the breakdown of how we get to this
number. So, the total as far as the residential impact is concerned
is a $.33 reduction in residential rate. If we put the reduction in
the commercial side and said look we're not going to get that we'll
just charge a little less to the residential. If that's what you're
after the impact on residential would be.approximately another $.08.
Is that clear or not clear?
IMPERIAL: Is there any question on this so far?
TRIPEPI: So, the new rate is $8.26 a month.
BRUESCH: The bottom line is how much? I have Modern Service $8.26.
That's what your bid was.
MODERN: I think it would be $7.85 would it not when we're finished?
BRUESCH: $8.26. You said $7.76 for single family dwelling plus $.50
for recycling.
MODERN: Right. And then I reduced it by $.41 if that's proper. I
gave you the breakdown of those three.
BRUESCH: Okay. So, it's $.41 less than that if you took off
recyclables and the franchise fees.
MODERN: Yes. What did you say now? Take off recyclables? No,
that's including recycling.
BRUESCH: No. What I'm saying is you don't split the recyclable with
the.....
MODERN: Just one fee? Is that what you're saying?
BRUESCH: Exactly. You keep all the proceeds from the recycling and
everything and the lowest amount.
MODERN: Yeah. If I understood right, Mr. Bruesch, we were not to
change our rates, we're just to figure out the reduction, the impact
of the franchise fee and that would be $.41 less than what we have.
What we have currently is.... $7.76 plus $.50......
TRIPEPI: No. Mr. Donohoo. What the Council wants is for you to back
all these figures out and give them the new low monthly rate for
Modern Service so they can compare to the other three.
CC 4-23-91
Page #14
• 0
MODERN: Okay.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. There's a couple of other items that I think
makes a big difference on this. We need to consider it. Modern
service - a one-time charge to residents for the recyclable
containers. Some of them are being provided at no cost. So, we need
the costs of these containers if we're......
McDONALD: Well, I think right now at this point we need to get down
to that rate with the franchise things that we decided on the
franchise fees back into that and then we'll address those other ones
if as we go through here.
TAYLOR: But then you need to keep in mind also on the vehicle
registration, Athens is providing all new trucks, Modern's the age of
the trucks weren't specified in their proposal.
MODERN: We have five brand new trucks.
TAYLOR: So, we do need to consider that because that was not in the
original proposal.
TRIPEPI: So if can Jim maybe we can just go along by column,and you
give us the figures. Does that work?
MODERN: Fine. Tell me....
TRIPEPI: You have $7.76 for single family dwellings. That now goes
to what?
MODERN: Okay. Again, to clarify this. I have in the...$.41...I have
reduced for the $7.76, 4%. I reduced the $.50, 4%. Is that what you
want?
McDONALD: Well, we add them together and get $8.26 and take the 4%
off it which is actually $.33.
MODERN: Which comes to $7.85.
TRIPEPI: So, now we go from $7.76 to $7.85?
BRUESCH: May I suggest something? When we're figuring these out so
we can start off on the same footing the bottom line is what it's
going to cost the resident. For my purposes I want to see the cost of
recycling and regular pickup together. Let's not separate them.
Because I want to see how much exactly it's going to cost each person
in the City of Rosemead. That's why I asked.
IMPERIAL: Okay. Then that's what we're going to want and everyone
has to follow the same curriculum.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I think that it's a good idea that they were
broke down because then we don't come back later on and say well no
the recycling was only worth $.30 a month. I think it's legitimate
Bob (referring to Councilman Bruesch) what we do have.
IMPERIAL: Then let's go back to the City Manager's suggestion and we
take it by column. Is everyone agreeable?
TAYLOR: I think we need it because anytime we want to question
something later on the figures will never match.
MODERN: $7.76 minus $.31 would be your number there.
TRIPEPI: $7.45.
McDONALD: Now, add....
CC 4-23-91
Page #15
a ~
MODERN: $.50 minus $.02 would be $.48 for recycling. And I still am
not sure what you want me to do with this $800 commercial figure. If
I threw it in the residential it amounts to about roughly $.08 a
month. If I bring it off the commercial I don't know what it's going
to be.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. My intent was just cut off all the franchise fees
so we're not trying to figure out where they are. So, it doesn't take
it from the commercial and pass it to the residential. It's
negligible. And for $800 we got to explain to 14,000 households why
we took $.02 more cents off.
MODERN: The only thing I'm thinking Mr. Taylor ...you know I
understand what you're saying.... if we take the commercial off it goes
somewhere but I don't think tonight and I'm sure these other men can't
either tell you what it's going to impact on everyone of the
collections. But I can tell you $800 is commercial drop. In that
area.
TAYLOR: It'll cost more to revise the rates than that.
MODERN: It would not be a very large rate change.
TRIPEPI: So, you have $7.93 for column one, single family dwellings.
Now, multiple family units, detached. First unit? Since that was
$7.76 do we assume that's also $7.93?
MODERN: I didn't do that one. $7.76 minus 4% so....
TRIPEPI: So, it's $7.93 also.
MODERN: Yes, it would be the same.
TAYLOR: That's adding the $.48 for recycling fee onto the base rate.
BRUESCH: I thought we weren't going to do that.
TRIPEPI: No, we are going to do that.
IMPERIAL: Let's get on the same sheet of music, gentlemen.
TRIPEPI: $6.85 for each additional unit.
MODERN: Okay. Our formula would be to take 4% off of that. So, we
take 96% of that figure. So in round figures that's $.27.
McDONALD: So, you'll take off....
BRUESCH: I'm sorry. I'm totally lost. I don't know what we're
doing.
McDONALD: Why don't we just ...that's the formula you're going to use.
You're going to take the 4% off the base fee, 4% off the $.50 and 1%
off the commercial. So, we can figure it out calculating wise. All
we want to do at this point is see the bottom line it's going to cost
us for yours to see if yours is still within the top four to sit in on
and maybe negotiate this problem. I think this is going to be a
frustrating thing if we're going to go column by column.
IMPERIAL: I don't see why we can't just get the bottom line and once
we do that let's get the breakdown.
McDONALD: Okay. Let me call these out. We have $7.93 calculated for
Modern Service for a single family with recycling, with the
reductions.
BRUESCH: $7.93? I got $7.85.
McDONALD: Athens is out there?
CC 4-23-91
Page #16
0
MODERN: That's with none of the commercial coming over.
McDONALD: That's with none of the commercial coming over. Athens
is... I've got $7.54 as your base, $1.35 for your co-mingled recycling,
4% off of that combination is about $.35.
ATHENS: That is correct.
McDONALD: $8.54 is what I come up with a base fee right there if we
subtract that $.35.
ATHENS: Our base rate is $7.54...
McDONALD: Plus $1.35.
ATHENS: No. Please. It's $7.54. If I take 4% franchise fee off of
that figure it leaves us with $7.25.
McDONALD: Okay. We're adding the recycling fee into that.
ATHENS: Right. But my $1.35 recycling fee is without franchise fee.
So, you have add $1.35 plus my $7.25 which leave me a total of $8.60.
McDONALD: Okay. So, you're not...we're not putting those two together
and taking 4% off of both of them. On your situation.....
ATHENS: You're taking 4$ off of $7.54.
McDONALD: And Modern took it actually off its recycling.
ATHENS: One difference also I must add is on Modern's recycling I
believe they mentioned that the City is going to pay for crates. In
our $1.35 we are supplying crates and we're giving back half of the
sales.
McDONALD: Yes. We'll get to that point. And so your figure is....
ATHENS: $8.60 for curb service with recycling.
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. Again, I hate to be devil's advocate but we're
looking at splits on recyclable pay back with the City. Are we
considering the fact that we don't want those fees coming, those
recyclable fees ...we have a 50/50 split in some cases, no split in a
couple of cases.
TRIPEPI: That's out.
McDONALD: We're not going to accept those even if they're offering
those but it's not something you can calculate on a dollar basis right
now because they don't know what they're going to get for the
recyclables.
ATHENS: Except for the fact that in my $1.35 I am giving back half of
the sales. Are you saying you don't want me to give you back half of
the sales and reduce my $1.35?
TAYLOR: If that's what your price would be then yes. If you know
that is then you can deduct it.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I think we just need to build some parameters
here, exactly what we're looking for and the basic cost and maybe we
didn't make that clear and because we didn't get that far in trying to
make a standard of these fees. We don't want any returns. We don't
want to be involved in the trash aspect.
IMPERIAL: Would you state your name for the record.
RON ARIKELLIAN, JR., VICE-PRESIDENT, ATHENS DISPOSAL COMPANY.
CC 4-23-91
Page #17
McDONALD: I think we need to apologize for the awkward way that we're
going about this because everybody presented it in one fashion and we
thought it was going to come through here but everybody added a few
more perks to each one of those things so it's a little difficult to
really throw everyone.....
ATHENS: I understand. If I could just add one thing. I had our
controller at our office put all these numbers together for us and
before this conversation took place with taking the franchise fee out
and I compared apples with apples with the 4% franchise fee on the
residential end and the 1% franchise fee on the commercial end. We
are the lowest overall company and I looked at every single service;
the curb service for the first unit, the curb service for the multiple
units, the roll-off service and the commercial service....
TAYLOR: What about the recycling?
ATHENS: ....and the recycling service, every service. I even
extended out the temporary services for the temporary bins and the
temporary roll-offs and I had to guesstimate the numbers.
TAYLOR: Well, with Modern giving us a $.50 price and yours a $1.35...
ATHENS: We're still lower. Modern beats us by $9900 a year which
that comes out to $820 a month just on the residential end. But when
you add our bin service prices versus their bin service prices we're
$11,000 a month less than they are.
TAYLOR: Do you have that available?
ATHENS: Yes, I do.
TAYLOR: We're not going to make a decision tonight. We're going to
just try to iron it out between the four that were selected.
ATHENS: Fine. What I would like to add though after extending all
those numbers out before this conversation took place tonight the
second lowest bidder after my company it's just about a tie between
BFI and Consolidated but when you take our total contract price versus
theirs we are still overall, the entire contract, $25,000 a month
less; $300,000 a year less; and $1,500,000 for the five-year contract
less. And we also are including green waste services in that where no
other company from what I understand is and we are supplying all of
the crates and I think Modern mentioned five brand new trucks. We
have over ten brand new trucks that we're buying. All of our crates
are going to be brand new. All of our trash containers are going to
be brand new. Every piece of equipment coming into this City will be
brand new equipment. And we'll be saving you $1,500,000 over the
five-year term and giving you back half of the sales back on the
recyclables. Would like some of that? I've got it right here.
TAYLOR: That's in your breakdown. If you could give us that tonight,
we're going to have to analyze it and there'll be some questions
afterward, I'm sure.
McDONALD: Is that included in there if we didn't take a percentage on
recyclable? Have you deducted that from the base residential?
ATHENS: If we keep the recyclable sales the rates would be even less.
McDONALD: Okay. That's what I wanted to know.
IMPERIAL: BFI.
BFI: Good evening. I'm John Decker from BFI. If I understood what
we were accomplishing here was backing out the franchise fees. 4%
franchise fees backed out of our rate of $7.80 would create a new rate
of $7.48 for residents. I've got the rates broken down across the
board in accordance to your spread sheet if you want them now.
CC 4-23-91
Page #18
0
0
TAYLOR: That's $7.48 still plus $1.73 for recycling.
BFI: That's correct, sir. We did not include a franchise fee for
recycling as per the bid document. 1% was included in the commercial
and 4% in all of our residential rates and would create a new single
family dwelling rate of $7.48.
TAYLOR: So, it's $7.48 plus $1.73.
BFI: Yes sir. That's correct.
TAYLOR: And this is correct as far as you're proposing six 1979 white
side loads and one 1991 Ford 350 fork truck and two 1991 Peterbilt
recycling trucks.
BFI: That's correct.
IMPERIAL: Last would be Consolidated.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Clarification. BFI, it states on the recycling
bins, that it would be one 14-gallon co-mingled bin paid by proposer.
On the Athens, it states stackable bins provided by proposer or paid
by proposer. Is it paid or provided?
ATHENS: It's provided and paid by us.
McDONALD: Why don't we throw that into our consensus evaluation and
make a determination right now what type of...did we say a 32 or 18?
Two 18s? We already made that decision, then.
BRUESCH: We might also say that it would be picked up by the company.
TAYLOR: Well, Modern Service, it states one-time charge to residents
for the stackable containers so in fairness to Modern.... Athens is
providing and paying for it.... BFI is paid by proposer and Modern it
says one-time charge to residents and we don't know what the fees are
for those containers yet.
IMPERIAL: Can you give an answer to that?
McDONALD: I think what we need to do is set those parameters and have
them fill in blocks again because we haven't given them an opportunity
to do that so we need the lowest possible cost for the residential fee
with all the franchise fees, anyway you want to do it back to us. I
think we want co-mingled. We want a certain type of container that
we've determined, two 18-gallons, one for green and one for
recyclables.
TAYLOR: Now, is Modern providing those or is the resident paying for
them?
McDONALD: I think we're going to give them an opportunity....
TAYLOR: I think we need to do it now because if we don't get it
straightened out all of them can have the option....
McDONALD: That's what we're giving them that information now and they
can tell us in their return what they're going to provide either
they're going to provide the two 18-gallons at cost to this or not
cost to that to the resident. We started out-with a big bailiwick
here and everybody came in with some certain perks and we're now
getting down to the point where we need to make it fair for each one
of the people that are providing it so we're limiting those to exactly
what we want here and once we set up those parameters they can only
put one thing in there.
IMPERIAL: (Talking to Modern Service) You haven't got that answer
now? You want to wait and give it to us? Okay.
CC 4-23-91
Page #19
9
CONSOLIDATED: Once again, John Tilesio with Consolidated Disposal. I
think you might recall from studying and reviewing our proposal that
we worked diligently to feature a special franchise fee structure or
formula if you will that in fact was to some degree a deviation from
what the RFP had specified. And we worked quite diligently in
developing this program and it provided a 61% higher return to the
City than the standard prescribed formula. Therefore, it was a little
bit more difficult for us to back out the franchise fee percentage if
you will because we approached it in a particularly special way and I
felt it was important to insure that we backed it out correctly and in
order for this to be equitable at the same for you to understand the
process which we followed I think you need to know that we as for that
matter a corporation operating in the private sector and under the
private enterprise system, have viewed this particular project if you
will or proposal as a revenue center, as a whole. We didn't break it
down in terms of its profitability on one particular type of operation
from another. Example, commercial from residential. Which means we
know what we can do a residential collection for and we know what we
can do a commercial for. Where we make our money in this deal, I'd be
happy to share it with you I guess in a more confidential setting, but
at this particular time is not the time or place but on that basis
what we did is we took a look at the entire revenue stream generated
from this contract. We determined what the entire, let me say
franchise fee burden, and at the same time the burden to provide for
the community fund would be. What we needed to do was to blend the
franchise fee rates and at the same time add to that the percentage
provision for the community fund. In doing so, I have a...by the way
I did not extend fully all of my calculations to all of the categories
and based on what's happened over the last few moments I don't know
that that's necessary. I can do it later of course. As far as the
standard residential.....
McDONALD: John, I think maybe when we put out the request for
proposals maybe we didn't make it clear to staff individually what we
were thinking along those terms. But we want to get out of the trash
business, the subsidy, getting any...we figure that any money that
comes back to the City is coming from where - the consumer. At this
point we're changing from a system that we have subsidized hopefully
to a position that is very competitive and we pay as we go fees type
of things like this Country is trying to turn over and do rather than
build a deficit. So, we apologize for that. But what we're going to
give you is an opportunity, it's not going to be decided tonight but
an opportunity to re-again plug in the things that we are specifically
asking that we want for our community. That nothing comes to us.
We'll give you a license and you can go with it from there. So, we
apologize for the approach that we've taken except that is was a
comprehensive approach and we wanted everything brought together and
what happened is everybody said well, we'll give you a little perk
here or we'll give you a little perk there and basically what we're
interested in is the lowest possible rate, the best possible service,
somebody we can work with for five, ten years possibly if it's a
renewable contract and somebody who and I think everyone that turned
in a plan here had a good history. Everybody has problems along the
road but everyone has a long history of providing that service and we
appreciate all the effort and work that everyone's done. So, we don't
need any and we apologize in one respect but we're going to give you a
new outline to follow.
TRIPEPI: You have a new rate now, John, don't you?
CONSOLIDATED: Yes, I do. I know this is a difficult process for you
and it's a trying process for all of us in the audience.
McDONALD: All those plans were beautiful. Everybody addressed them
in the way we wanted them to address them but they added a few things
that kind of threw a wrench into everybody else's concept and we
apologize for that.
CC 4-23-91
Page #20
CONSOLIDATED: Apology accepted. Okay. As far as the residential per
unit rate per month based on the calculations which I performed a few
moments ago, I have a base rate of $8.43 a month which includes
recycling services and the backyard collection services for the
bonafide handicapped citizens. That provides a revised senior rate of
$5.90 a month. I don't know that this is appropriate. I did give
this some consideration. I would like to raise it and see how you
feel about this. We-are the only company that bid-on this service
contract without an additional cost for the collection of bulky items
or what we refer to as bulky items, those special items.
McDONALD: That's the greatest thing I saw about your whole thing.
Because people have had that for a long time. Modern Service has
provided that for years. I know it was costing them extra but they
offered that service that if you called 24-hours ahead of time they'd
pick up anything. And people still talk about that one time where
they've called up and somebody picked up a bulky thing and it didn't
cost them.
CONSOLIDATED: I think we have the same kind of response from our
customers and we do the same thing, that's what we do in all our
cities. But there is a cost impact on us for doing that. That's
something we're throwing in. It's an equivalent to a return although
it's not tangible, it's not visible in dollars and cents. It's a
return that we're providing back. If we were to include, I'm not
saying that we need to do that, I just want to present it to you. If
we were to include let's say a $10 per month cost, a $10 per item cost
which I think is comparable with one of the lowest bids that you have
on this sheet and I still have the matrix in front of me, if we were
to do that we would be able to provide all the services which we have
talked about throughout this process including the recycling and the
backyard collection service for $7.92 a month, single family standard
collection service and for $5.55 a month for the hardship rate for
senior citizens. But once again I'm saying if we want to talk apples
CONSOLIDATED CONTINUES: to apples and not apples to peaches then we
would need to do that in order to accurately provide you a rate which
is competitive.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Clarification. You say it would be $7.92.
That's if you are allowed a $10 service charge on a special pickup.
CONSOLIDATED: That's correct, sir.
TAYLOR: But you would still have the free quarterly pickup.
CONSOLIDATED: Oh, yeah.
TAYLOR: Okay. That's what all the contracts are basically geared
for. You have a fee right here, special one-time drop per roll-off
per bin is $155 plus the tip fee.
CONSOLIDATED: Yes, sir.
TAYLOR: What is...would you explain that.
CONSOLIDATED: That's the dump costs. It's a volume based or user
friendly type of approach. In other words we have a service cost
which in other words covers the cost of us driving out to the home to
deliver and then to retrieve the container and we bill you in addition
to that and that cost is $155, in addition to that we would bill you
the exact amount of dump costs that we incur by tip, by disposing of
the trash which you generate. However, that cost would go down and I
have not recalculated that cost.
TAYLOR: The $155 is strictly the service fee plus dumping fee,
whatever the tip fee is.
CONSOLIDATED: But that base service price would go down. I need to
reiterate that.
CC 4-23-91
Page #21
C
L~
TAYLOR: I'd ask Modern or Athens this same question. They have a
$98.80 charge plus the dump fee.
BRUESCH: Right now, the dumping fee is $14.50 per ton.
TAYLOR: That's what Athens told us last meeting or where did you get
that?
BRUESCH: I looked it up. It's $14.50 per ton.
CONSOLIDATED: Sir. I believe we'd be somewhere around $125 for the
base price but I won't say that with any certainty. I have not been
able to run the calculations comfortably. Once again, at a more
convenient time I'd be happy to extend all the other calculations and
provide you that information.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. We haven't really touched on what the
nitty-gritty's going to be. This is all basic rates. What happens
next year and for the five year contract? How are going to determine
the CPI cost increase and the dump fees or the tipping fees, they're
going to be almost automatic assessments coming from the dumps. But
that CPI, I think we.need to get that resolved so we know the base
rules and how we're going to determine it.
IMPERIAL: Okay. We can follow this process again if you want and get
each contractor up here.
TAYLOR: I think that's the most important thing now because they're
annual increases and if we can't control them then they can go wild.
IMPERIAL: Let's have Modern up here again.
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. In the packets that we received and I asked for
this specific information last time about what formula you were going
BRUESCH CONTINUES: to use in writing and every response was in this
packet and some of them placed it as some type of formula. Other
people said basically they would take CPI and a percentage of the tip
fees. Others said it would be the CPI plus tip fees. As simply as
possible, explain as you come up, the four companies, as simply as
possible explain what you have in your thing here. I have a pretty
good idea but there's some confusing.....
IMPERIAL: That was my intent for calling them up, Mr. Bruesch.
McDONALD: Let's get a standard formula and tell them they have to use
it, rather than have them tell us.
TAYLOR: Let's find that standard formula.
TRIPEPI: So, what the Mayor has asked is each contractor come up in
the same order and tell us what formula you're going to use for the
five years. I think you've all said pretty much CPI plus dump fees,
tipping fees. So, I guess that's what they want to hear or explain or
answer a question that one of them might have.
IMPERIAL: Will that about do it for tonight then?
TAYLOR: I think this is one of the most important things, Mr. Mayor.
We've got to find out how the base increases are going to be made for
the next four years.
IMPERIAL: Okay. We'll have Modern first.
MODERN: I don't have that formula memorized but it's a formula that's
used in the industry. It takes into consideration insurance rates,
takes into consideration labor charges, dump fees, several factors.
We'd be glad to work that out.
CC 4-23-91
Page 122
• •
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. That's one of the things that we're going to try
to get away from because we're going to have the pass throughs from
the dumps so we don't want that in the CPI and as far as gasoline
increases every consumer or resident in this City they don't get an
increase because gas goes up. That's one of the problems that we do
have. We want it simple and it's got to be a basic rate. When we
start throwing in the insurance rates, I don't get an increase because
my and all of us know what happened to auto insurance but nobody give
me an increase so it's take your best shot at it and figure out what
that percentage is going to be and everyone else will be doing the
same thing.
MODERN: If we're going to do that in all due respect to everybody
here I think we ought to have time to put that together.
BRUESCH: I've seen in some of these exactly what Mr. Taylor is asking
for. Exactly. This times this times this times this. And you were
asked to give that same information last meeting. I don't see that in
your information.
MODERN: I wasn't here last meeting and that wasn't conveyed to me. I
was not aware of that.
BRUESCH: It wasn't even addressed in your additional material because
I looked.
MODERN: I wasn't aware that you wanted it.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Mr. McDonald made the comment as far as this
particular item how we can set down a factor or a rate or however
we're going to do it. I guess the input that we could use tonight
from these four companies, a guideline for the staff to evaluate, did
they all four present the same criteria? Because I agree with what
Mr. Donohoo's saying. They're not going to be able to figure out the
percentages tonight. That's almost impossible. But I think that we
need all four of them understand what we're looking for. We don't
want a bunch of figures thrown in that the price of gasoline, how much
it fluctuates every month or so. There's got to be some method of
across the board. If it's going to be a 4%, a 5%, take your best shot
at it. But we don't want a bunch of figures coming in every year that
we've got to go back and analyze well who did you get them from and
what's valid. Just like the stock market, who's the best reporters
for that. I think that groundwork needs to be laid.
MODERN: Would it be your preference that we have a percentage of the
base rate and let it go at that. Is that what you're suggesting?
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. Again, what was requested last meeting was a
formula on which to base your rate increases. I don't what my
colleagues were saying. I didn't want percentages. I didn't want to
have how much you're going to charge us and what percentage. I just
want to know what formula you're going to base those percentages on.
That's basically what we asked.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I disagree with that and Mr. Bruesch may disagree
with me. But we're looking for that simple fee or interest rate. We
don't want a bunch of formulas as far as I'm concerned. That same
formula is going to break down. In the overall end it becomes a
percentage of that price. How they arrive at it I really don't want
to know it. I want to know what that fee is. What the best shot is.
If you can say it's going to be 3% or 4% or 5%, then how you arrive at
that.... everyone of you could come up with a different formula. I
think that would be more confusing. Keep it at a simple rate.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. We really can't do that. I think if you want
to come up with a CPI figure, April to April, May to May, or something
like that, for the standard of living that goes on here. Also, if you
want to give us a percentage on the amount the dump fees go up or you
could say CPI plus 100% of dump fees would be one methodology of doing
it or because some in here took a certain percentage of the CPI and
CC 4-23-91
Page #23
11
•
McDONALD CONTINUES: took a certain percentage of the dump fees and
took a certain percentage of that or what we're doing is looking for
something similar. I think we could almost....
ROBERT KRESS, CITY ATTORNEY: I just want to add one point to that.
The CPI, a percentage of dump fee increases if the company is
suggesting that that be part of the increase component and whether or
not there is any cap on that; if you're willing to accept a cap per
year. I think those are the three questions.
TRIPEPI: Then to go back and not to disagree with Mr. Taylor but Gary
I don't think any of the companies are going to give you a figure that
they're going to be willing to hold to for five years because they
can't predict or project what the CPI is going to do and if they lock
in at 3% and one year it goes up 8%.... they're going to basically
state to you a percentage formula based on something. If I'm wrong, I
want somebody to tell me.
IMPERIAL: They can say 3% and no more than 2% based on the raise.
TRIPEPI: Yeah. But I don't think they'll give you a figure.
MODERN: I still have a question for the direction.
McDONALD: The direction would be to give us some sort of formula that
has the CPI, maybe something about the dump fees, and if you're going
to offer a cap on those for a period of time or something like that.
Those three things will give us a guideline to go by - CPI, if use the
same CPI and the agreement says April to April it would be the same
for everybody based on the Long Beach, Anaheim, LA area type of thing.
So, that gives us a definitive parameter that we can measure. And if
you say also 50% of the tipping costs there over a period of time
we're going to know exactly what that is because the sanitation adds a
tax here the State adds a tax, the Feds add a tax here and they
increase the cost but what we want and also the variable that you
might give us to say hey we'll absorb some of that but we won't absorb
some of that or we'll cap it or so forth.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. One of the comments prior to the meeting or we
were discussing at break was there's a lot of items in that Consumer
Price Index that really wouldn't affect a rubbish business. What
criteria are we going to use for that CPI? Does that include all of
the different items in the national economy? Or home mortgages? Or
insurance rates? What's going to set that CPI? Is that a valid
concern or.....
McDONALD: I don't think so because the CPI is based on every
individual that lives in this area and every individual who lives in
this area works for a company and the cost they're getting as far as
the wages are concerned as compared to everyone else's, their standard
of living has gone up that same percentage. And so when you
talk ...and everything else even though you don't feed a business you
figure in the people that work for that business so I think it comes
out fairly useful to use that figure for wage.
IMPERIAL: That's how you come up with that max of 2% of raise or
below the 3% if that's what it happens to be.
McDONALD: I was just trying to figure if there were some way we could
address Mr. Taylor's concern. But I don't think there is because
that's a figure that's provided to us. It's a standard figure that
everybody uses. I think we're stuck with that. If you want to reduce
it because it happens to be a business and you don't think you use
that much, that's fine. That's something to offer.
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. There's from the Bureau of Labor Statistics they
have numerous price ratios. They have the Producer Price Index
instead of the Consumer Price Index. I happen to know that certain
companies use that as a factor. There's a lot of numbers that you can
use. Basically, what we're looking for is something that we can tie
into so that there's absolutely no way to misinterpret as has happened
CC 4-23-91
Page #24
0
BRUESCH CONTINUES: in the past. That's what I'm looking for. I don't
want somebody coming back in two years and say well we said 3% but we
included this and not that. I want it down in black and white as much
as possible so that there can be no misinterpretation.
McDONALD: I think that's what the CPI offers us, Bob (referring to
Councilman Bruesch), to work with that as a ,base and also a percentage
of the tip fees because the trash haulers here have no influence on
those trash fees.
TAYLOR: Now, aren't those trash fees passed directly on as part of
the proposal?
IMPERIAL: Yes. I guess that's the intent.
TAYLOR: My understanding was that that was one of the items that they
would pass right through to the City each year. So, now we include
that, that just jacks up the CPI cost. It shouldn't be in there
because it's a direct pass through.
BRUESCH: The problem of using that is that the tip fees are a
percentage of......
McDONALD: Excuse me, Bob (referring to Councilman Bruesch). If we're
going to have a direct pass through on those that doesn't even need to
be considered.
TAYLOR: That's what I'm saying.
McDONALD: They're just going to add that right on top. I think we
ought to offer them the opportunity to cap those for us.
BRUESCH: If what I'm hearing the consensus is that the increase be
limited to the CPI plus the pass through of the tipping fees and
that's as simple as we can get.
McDONALD: That's max. We offer them the opportunity to give us
something better. But right now CPI gives us a reasonable evaluation
of what's going on in the community and the tip fees is just something
like Gary (referring to Councilman Taylor) said we have no control
over those. Those are a complete pass through. That's the max price
it would be for any individual here that wants to add that through. I
think we ought to give them the opportunity to.....
BRUESCH: When we start dealing with insurance and gas like that,
that's business expense. That has to be overhead. That has to be
considered as part of.....
McDONALD: But that's considered in the CPI.
IMPERIAL: Let's just I thought we weren't going to consider that.
Let's keep on track so we can get this meeting over something within
the next decade. Let's have Athens next.
ATHENS: Good evening. I'm Dennis Chiappetta, General Manager of
Athens. I think we've kind of simplified this for you and even given
you contract language with regard to how the rates, the structure for
the rate increase would be. Simply put, we ask for an annual CPI
adjustment that would be based on all urban consumers for Los Angeles,
Anaheim, Riverside area. We'd like to establish a 1982-84 index. And
simply put we'll take our base rate which is $7.25, next July take the
change in that index and increase the rate accordingly. I believe
that the landfill pass through should be mutually exclusive. We
should not get a double hit and get CPI adjustment on that again so
we'll take the actual tons that have gone to landfill minus the
diverted tons of course that have gone through our recycling program,
take the actual landfill increase up at County sanitation and BKK
landfill and pass that on directly to the residents and the commercial
businesses.
CC 4-23-91
Page #25
•
•
TAYLOR: What's the advantage of taking the 82-84 base on the CPI?
ATHENS: We can establish any base. I mean
when you begin a program. I believe that's
be acceptable and that we could go off of.
what year we begin though. Do you have any
the two types of increases. The only other
increase is to come in and beg and I can as
doing that.
you have to pick a base
the latest base that would
It doesn't really matter
questions with regard to
way possible to get an
>ure you that we won't be
McDONALD: No. I think what you've got there is what we're asking
for.
ATHENS: Okay. And again we've included the contract language. I
would like to express one concern regarding the way the proceedings
went just a bit earlier. You asked us all to go out and in 15 minutes
and deduct our franchise fees from the existing rate structure. I
believe that three of the companies successfully did that according to
my calculations. I'm not sure why Consolidated is having such a
difficult time taking the 2% franchise fee off the residential and the
5% franchise fee off the commercial and developing a straight rate and
I would like to know if we're all going to have the ability to rebid
this such as they did a few moments ago.
TAYLOR: I would agree with your intent there because it's unfair to
put the three of you at a disadvantage when it's all cut and dried
right now. I don't think that's the proper way to handle it, to let
Consolidated go back and find some way and I'm not saying they will,
but it's an open door for one.and the other three have already given
us a rate.
ATHENS: I would just ask for your advice or
going to do in the future on this. It would
able to renegotiate a contract here. We put
first time. Again, approximately a $300,000
calculations or $1.5 million over the length
like to just see the two and five percents t
this reflected in the record, please.
guidance as to what we're
appear that they were
our best foot forward the
savings a year due to our
of the contract and I'd
sken off theirs and have
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. I can see that we're going to need at least one
more meeting on this.
IMPERIAL: I think you're right, Mr. Bruesch. I'm going to suggest
when we get through with this that we hold a special meeting next
Tuesday to complete this so that we don't come on a deadline that we
can't meet but go ahead.
BRUESCH: I was going to suggest next Tuesday, also.
CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I just would like to say though that it seems to
me we're letting everybody renegotiate the cap they want to put on the
fees. When we asked for how they wanted the increases the only two
companies that came back that I could see and correct me if I'm wrong,
that came back with any kind of a cap were Consolidated and Zakaroff.
So, now we're saying come back with the best offer you can get. Now,
if that's what we.want to do fine, but we're saying don't let anybody
else renegotiate but we will let you renegotiate your cap.
ATHENS: I'd just like to ask where the term cap came from? We were
instructed and correct me if I'm wrong staff. perhaps, to simply
clarify what we'd do in terms of CPI adjustment and automatic
landfill. There was never a request or a question regarding would be
put a cap on.
TRIPEPI: That is correct. What we asked for was to give us the
formula that you're going to use for the next five years. And
Vice-Mayor Clark is correct. Two of those companies came back and
said that basically they're taking a cap. That's their choice.
ATHENS: That's additional information or additional things that
they've said that they would do over and above your request, then.
CC 4-23-91
Page 26
•
TRIPEPI: Well, no. It's basically all on the same plane. They were
asked to give us a formula, they gave us a formula. You gave us
yours, they gave us theirs:
McDONALD: Mr. Kress. We've kind of opened up Pandora's Box here
allowing certain changes to be'made in these things. What is the
appropriateness of possibly limiting it to those four and have them
come back with their shot. Is that inappropriate because they've
already bid that or is Council here looking for the best possible
price for our electorate? Can we ask them to come back with another
shot?
IMPERIAL: Mr. Kress will be available Monday not Tuesday so I'm going
to have to rephrase that and say yes we can have this meeting Monday
if Council approves and what's your answer to that Mr. Kress?
KRESS: Monday's fine. In terms of what's going on.. I think earlier
this evening there was an effort to say we want to be out of the trash
business. We wanted to find a company to provide the service, to deal
directly with the residents and businesses. On the one hand the City
doesn't want to pay any portion of those fees on behalf of the
residents or businesses as it presently is doing and at the same time
any franchise fees or other benefits that, monetary benefits that were
offered in essence, the City Council would like to cash those in in
terms of the lowest possible rate. That's all definable and I think
deals with the existing proposals. Maybe it takes more than 15
minutes to come up with some of these numbers and what they actually
carry out to across the flow chart. If you're going to totally open
it up to the top four leading contenders I think you have the
jurisdiction to do that but at the same time you're starting the
process over again. I've expressed some concern about completing this
deal within the next 30 days because basically that's if you want me,
personally, to be involved and not someone else in the firm, that's
when it has to get done. I have that time frame and then I'm on
vacation. I think you need to be consistent at this point and if
you're going to have it be a free-for-all with only four leading
contenders based on this first round and the analysis the Council has
provided, that may well lengthen the process.
IMPERIAL: Well, if we're going to do that for four why are not going
to do it for nine.
ATHENS: May I express one concern regarding that. I think as the
lowest apparent bidder our company has the most to suffer from that.
Again, we put our best foot forward and I think it would be relatively
easy for others to match that price at this point.
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. I think it's very simple. Instead of going
around the bush, we've basically said take the franchise fees off the
rates. We don't want to come back with all sorts of new rate
structures. It's a very basic thing. Take your 4% off the single
family rates as was stated and I think our staff can do that. They
don't have to come to us. If we were to take these figures here and
add to that the franchise fees that were here and come back and take
the residential franchise fees off that we come up with a figure.
They don't have to come back with those figures at all to us and I
think that's what we should do.
McDONALD: Mr. Mayor. I might not have any business principles at
all, Bob (referring to Councilman Bruesch) but if I can get a lower
rate than what we've got on paper right now I'd let them go out. I'm
not here to make a quick decision on a trash program. What we've
given these four contenders that we have right now we've given the
opportunity to bid and now they're in the final round. I think my
responsibility is to the citizens of this community not to make a
quick decision on something. You can say anything you like but if you
want to make a decision based on what we have and have staff kind of
conclude it here, I don't think so. Because I want to be the one that
makes the decision on what is made here and I want the lowest possible
bid and price we can get for our consumer. All four of these
companies are good companies. You look at their background, some do
CC 4-23-91
Page #27
•
0
McDONALD CONTINUES: this a little better, some do that a little better
but I think they could all do the job. What I'm looking for is the
lowest possible price.
BRUESCH: My worry is if we start messing around with the figures...
McDONALD: I'm not going to mess with any figures. They're going to
provide me with that.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. In business, this is known as cutthroat. Now, if
we open it to these four then the other five are entitled to go back
and all right everybody cut everybody's throat.
McDONALD: All we're doing here is shrinking the parameters, now.
TAYLOR: But they're all nine entitled to shrink the parameters.
McDONALD: No. They all came in here and gave us a bid and we picked
the top four.
TAYLOR: Right. Now, let's respect that bid rather than say okay
we're going the take the low half and let them fight it out and not
even the other half the chance to reconsider. That isn't the way you
do business.
BRUESCH: I agree with Councilman Taylor. We asked for a bid. We got
those bids. We asked for a return to the consumer of the franchise
fee. It's very simple to take those bids and basically take the 4%
off of them.
McDONALD: Then you certainly don't need us here to make the decision,
then. Staff could have made it to begin with.
BRUESCH: No. No. I'm not saying that at all. No siree. I'm saying
that we asked for a simple 4%. I do not want it to go back and then
everybody start like Gary (referring to Councilman Taylor) said cut
throating each other because then we start opening up a can of worms
and saying okay the bidding is open again and.I'm worried about the
legal aspects of that. I really am.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. We started out with Modern Service, they gave us
their.best shot for tonight, what they proposed was $7.76 minus the
4%, put it down to $7.45 plus the $.48 on the recycle program brought
it to $7.93. Then, we had Athens come up with their $7.54 minus the
4% brought it to $7.25 plus the $1.35 for the recycling, so we've got
$8.60. So, that was legitimate as far as simple to follow. Then BFI
came forward and they have a rate of $7.80. They took off the 4% and
that became $7.48 plus the $1.73 for the recycle program. So, that
becomes $9.21. And then Consolidated started out with a basic rate of
$8.99. Then it was cut down to a price of I don't know where the
percentage came from it didn't match anything we had, it got cut down
to $8.43 and that includes the recycling. And then if we have a
special one-time pickup allowance of $10 per item then that dropped it
down to $7.92. So, it's been.kind of whittled away. Consolidated is
the hardest one to follow because there was no base rates it was just
a special program put together. So, we do have some legitimate rates
that were given to us tonight and I think they deserve amount of
respect rather than turn them in like a cock fight and let them fight
each other now.
IMPERIAL: So, what's your pleasure, Mr. Taylor?
TAYLOR: We need to get the final solution as far as the CPI. If
they're all going to have the exact criteria, all four of them could
say tonight it will be the CPI for LA, Riverside, San Bernardino, base
year 1982-84 and the pass through. That's the two items. Is there
anything else that needs to be considered?
CLARK: Consolidated offered a cap of the first three years at 5%.
Are we going to ignore that or are we going to let everybody else
match that or better it?• CC 4-23-91
Page #28
BRUESCH: If that's what they're willing to give, if that's their
bottom line, if it's less than what we expect, then accept it.
TAYLOR: That was on their original proposal, though, that creative
one for $8.99. Now, we're going to say get it down to the lowest
price you can and hold your cap for three years on your original
proposal. If they're agreeable to that, then that's their choice.
IMPERIAL: Are you agreeable to that, Consolidated?
CONSOLIDATED: Yes, sir.
IMPERIAL: Okay.
We are agreeable to that.
TAYLOR: Are all four companies in agreement as far as the CPI?
ATHENS: As far as the cap is concerned or just as far as the CPI and
the auto. I think it should be an annual CPI and an automatic
landfill increase exclusive of CPI.
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. If we're going to have a meeting next Monday then
we could put this together with the true cost and we could estimate
what the percentage increase, it won't be locked in, but at least
we'll have a chance to see what's happening with the CPI since
1982-84.
BRUESCH: Mr. Mayor. In terms of that again, with my fear of opening
up a can of worms, I hate to keep on using that phrase, but we want to
make it as cut and dried as possible, we want to make it so that at no
time can we be accused of opening up the bidding again.
IMPERIAL: Well, you know anybody can make an accusation. But I think
everything went the way we wanted it tonight. We asked the questions,
we got them. Sure, you can open up a can of worms in here every half
hour if that's what you want to do. We asked for figures, we got
them. I don't know what the problem is. We can play this game
forever. What do we want, gentlemen?
TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. I think we've narrowed it down but for our
meeting next Monday I'd like this line item across the page showing
the commercial rates also with the 1% deducted, the multi-residential
rates deducted, the 4%. Then I feel 99% confident we'll have it next
Monday.
IMPERIAL: Okay. You have that direction. Any other comments?
McDONALD: We're accepting then the rates that they have given us,
the low rates that each one of them have given us as the figure
tonight?
IMPERIAL: That's what I feel we're accepting, yes.
TAYLOR: I understand that. Minus the 4% right across the board in
residential and the 1% across the commercial charges. If they have a
bin for one, two, three, four, five or six days on that commercial
property, all of it had a 1%. It's a minute change as Mr. Donohoo
said it's only $800 for the year or else like I said the paperwork's
more expensive than that.
McDONALD: So, we have Athens at $8.60; BFI at $9.21; Modern Service
at $7.93; and Consolidated at $7.92.
TAYLOR: That's on that one rate and then the same percentages would
apply across all the multiple family in columns five, six. You take
the 4% off and see how they all average out.
ATHENS: Again, I'd just like to say that if you just take off the
existing franchise fee of 5% and 2% I certainly can't come to $7.92
for Consolidated and I'd like an apples for apples comparison, please.
CC 4-23-91
Page #29
LA
U
IMPERIAL: I'm very sorry I didn't get back to you on those phone
calls you made to me. I've been very busy the last three days.
ATHENS: No problem. Thank you.
CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I would just like to make a comment concerning
Cal-San. I'm very impressed with their red alert program and the
training of the trash haulers in CPR and earthquake preparedness and I
would like to see that in every company. I think that's really good
where you have people out there. That way you know that at any time
in your City you've got somewhere you've got people that are ready to
respond to that emergency. And I'm sorry that I can't come to the
demonstration we were invited to because I will be at the We-Tip
Convention and the rest of the Council I think will be at the Chamber
of Commerce Conference but I am very impressed with that and I just
wanted to say that.
IMPERIAL: We'll defer this item to next Monday at what time's
convenient, gentlemen? Seven? All right, so we'll defer this item
until next Monday at seven o'clock.
END VERBATIM DIALOGUE
B. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC RELATIONS
SERVICES
After some discussion, it was MOVED BY COUNCILMAN McDONALD,
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that the Council award the contract for
public relation services to the Gardner Communications Group. Vote
resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: Taylor
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
VII. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS
A. MAYOR'S COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS FOR 1991-92
No action was required on this item.
B. REQUEST FROM COMMISSIONER ORTIZ FOR REAPPOINTMENT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION '
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN McDONALD, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH that
Commissioner Ortiz be reappointed to the Planning Commission. Vote
resulted:
Yes: Bruesch, Taylor, Imperial, Clark, McDonald
No: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Councilman Taylor requested that the Minutes regarding the trash
proposals be verbatim.
There being no further action to be taken at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:40 p.m. to Monday, April 29, 1991, at 7:00
p.m. for continuation of consideration of the trash proposals.
Respectfully submitted:
ce GU~Z~i2 eat/
C' Clerk
CC 4-23-91
Page #30