SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Monday Nov. 27: Waste Services Contract Presentation
The long awaited garbage/solid waste contract will be presented to the City Council off-camera in the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) on November 27.
Every property owner in Piedmont must subscribe to the contracted services.
Residents eager to learn what the City Council has in store for them may want to attend a Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, November 27, 2017, in the Police Department, Emergency Operation Center (EOC), 403 Highland Avenue.
Public meetings held in the EOC, do not lend themselves to video recordings and broadcasting, making the important information and subsequent Council discussions not easy to be observed or to be understood by the vast majority of residents.
Residents complained when the preliminary waste collection service cost estimates indicated substantial increases of 60% for curbside service and 120% for backyard service.
Of great concern to many following the contract development has been the high cost of the proposed service compared to other cities. Those needing backyard/side yard service, such as the elderly, will face significantly higher fees and cumbersome government reviews.
The City of Piedmont budget gains from the mandatory fees under the proposed contracted. The fees are used to pay for City services and staffing. In some cities, municipal garbage services are factored into the overall cost of running their city, making the garbage collection costs tax deductible for property owners. This has not been proposed in Piedmont, nor was tax deductibility of the service considered for inclusion in the recent voter approved municipal property taxes.
Read previous articles here and here and here.
The City notice states:
The Piedmont City Council will consider adopting a Solid Waste Services Agreement with Richmond Sanitary Services (dba Republic Services) at its regular meeting scheduled for December 4, 2017.
Prior to the December 4, 2017 Regular meeting, the City Council will hold a study session on November 27th to be briefed on the terms of the agreement.
Please visit the City’s website, where you will find more information and links to copies of the staff report, to which the proposed agreement is attached, and a slideshow presentation for the Council’s study session.
Relevant Documents:
To learn more about current solid waste services in Piedmont visit: www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/recycling-waste.shtml
If you have comments about the solid waste services agreement, please send them to the City Council at citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov.
If you have questions about the agreement or approval process, please contact Assistant Planner Chris Yeager at (510) 420-3067 or cyeager@piedmont.ca.gov.
Special City Council Meeting Agenda
Monday, November 27, 2017 6:30 p.m.
Open to the public
Emergency Operations Center (EOC), Police Dept., 403 Highland Avenue, Piedmont, CA
1. Presentation on the Proposed Franchise & Solid Waste Collection Services Agreement with Republic Services
The proposed rate increase is outrageous. Does anyone know what the rates are in Oakland for comparable service? If substantially less, then maybe Piedmont needs to go in on the Oakland contract instead of going it alone and missing out on economies of scale.
Is this outrageous proposal going to be heard at an open public hearing? When?
The published City of Oakland rates for July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 for the basic three cart 32 gallon service is $44.93 for curbside and doubles to $88.21 for backyard. The Piedmont service does include some extras such as unlimited green and recycling pickup that are extra cost with the Oakland service.
Backyard service at curbside rates for Seniors is a common practice in the region, as stated by the City’s own consultant. The City has declared this common practice legally questionable and disallowed it.
The first reading of the ordinance to accept the new Republic contract is this Monday Dec. 4th.
Michael raises a good question and the staff report has a projection showing that Waste Management is actually cheaper than Republic in 2018-2019. WM did not bid, claiming worker comp costs associated with backyard service were too high but based on the projection and asssuming 50% backyard service, approx $865,000 would be available to get backyard cans to the street for WM to pick up (131-91 x 12 x (3600 x 0.5) – see table in staff report. That’s a lot of funds for a sub-contracting service to get the backyard cans to the street.
Judging from staff report, it is not clear whether staff and a select sub-committee considered this option:
“An evaluation panel comprised of the Directors of Public Works and Planning, community members John Chiang and Patty Siskind, and former City Council Member Jeff Wieler met on
June 15, 2017 and June 27, 2017 to discuss Republic Services’proposal and options for moving forward for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council. The evaluation panel considered the two primary options for moving forward with the procurement process, either: 1)
canceling this RFP and issuing another RFP(s) with parameters that would encourage submittals from additional proposers, or 2) accepting Republic Services’ proposal and proceeding with contract negotiations.
The possible parameters to encourage greater responses by means of a new RFP that were considered included:
A modified backyard service requirement that would reduce or eliminate the provision of backyard services. The high proportion (~50%) of Piedmont residences currently receiving backyard service, as well as input from the community indicating a high degree of support for backyard service, suggested that this option would not be preferred.
Splitting a new solicitation into two RFPs separating the collection component of services from the disposal component of services. Considering the efficiencies achieved by having
one provider of all the requested services, this approach would be unlikely to result in lower rates even if it resulted in additional proposals. ”
Based on the projections, it seems the “splitting” option should be investigated as an alternative.
The aspect of all this that I find most disturbing is the opaque “evaluation panel.” The community was not consulted and past ballot arguments show two of the three panel members, Wieler and Chiang, to have never seen an increase in taxes and subsequent resident cost they didn’t love and support. Perhaps a more even toned panel would have come to a different conclusion and been more open to other than the single bidder contract with Republic Services that the Council is about to pass.
To be very clear, Waste Management, Oakland’s provider, had two issues. The first is the backyard service and Waste Management does provide that in Oakland; perhaps Waste Management would have wanted more than a higher markup in Piedmont. The other Waste Management issue, not named in the City documentation but contained in the Waste Management response letter, is whether the City was willing to go to an automated lift system. This is simply a different type of collection cart that mates to a lift on the truck. As the City is expecting Republic to provide new trucks, this was already baked into the cake.
Certainly any documents or supporting materials used by the evaluation panel should be made public, ammended to the two staff reports leading to this option. R3, the consultant, participated in the evaluation committee – they likely presented materials to the community members. Perhaps Patty or John could weigh in on this.
Garrett, Were you contacted by the City to be on the Evaluation Committee? You were on the Council for 8 years and as I recall you were the Council Liaison to Stopwaste. You would have more experience in this particular field than the other three Committee members.
I was not. But why did Councilman Rood not participate in the Evaluation Committee? He is the city’s current representative to StopWaste and would seem a logical choice.
The evaluation committee cites the efficiencies of one provider but all that is needed to enlist Waste Management (VM) is to get the bins to the street – all other efficiencies that WM would bring could then be achieved. Lacking any substantive report from the committee, it seems the city may have lost an opportunity for some real savings here. Can anyone from the committee or city staff explain why WM can provide curb and backyard service in Oakland at such lower rates? Did anyone from staff or R3 inquire about this?
I was not. But why did Councilman Rood not participate in the Evaluation Committee? He is the city’s current representative to StopWaste and would seem a logical choice.
The evaluation committee cites the efficiencies of one provider but all that is needed to enlist WM is to get the bins to the street – all other efficiencies that WM would bring could then be achieved. Lacking any substantive report from the committee, it seems the city may have lost an opportunity for some real savings here. Can anyone from the committee or city staff explain why WM can provide curb and backyard service in oakland at such lower rates? Did anyone from staff or R3 inquire about this?