HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 15, 2023 G-01 PHCITY OF
Z10
zt�
v
CALIFORNIA
AGENDA ITEM ri . I
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider Adopting Resolution Setting Future Solid Waste Rates
Pursuant to Proposition 218 for Residential Customers
MEETING DATE: March 15, 2023
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Public hearing to consider adopting resolution setting future solid waste
rates pursuant to Proposition 218 for residential customers.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: CalRecycle has adopted regulations consistent with the mandates
associated with Senate Bill 1383. The mandates are designed to achieve
the organic waste reduction goals established in Section 39730.6 of the
Health and Safety Code through a 50 percent reduction in the level of statewide disposal of organic waste from
the 2014 level by 2020; and a 75 percent reduction in the level of statewide disposal of organic waste from the
2014 level by 2025. This is an unfunded State mandate.
The City is required to comply with these regulations to assist the State in achieving the organic waste
reduction levels outlined above. The main requirements resulting from the regulations include the adoption of
an enforcement ordinance, implementation of mandatory residential and commercial food waste collection, and
education and outreach. Jurisdictions are required to implement SB 1383 by January 1, 2022. At the February
16, 2022 meeting, Council adopted the Notice of Intent to Comply (NOIC). By filing the NOIC, CalRecycle is
authorized to waive civil penalties until January 1, 2023 if a jurisdiction intends to comply with the SB1383
requirements. On March 2, 2022, Council introduced an ordinance amending the Lodi Municipal Code Title 13
"Public Health Services," which allows the City to enforce SB1383 requirements on business and residents
beginning January 1, 2024.
Staff is currently working with Waste Management to provide substantial outreach to our customers regarding
organics recycling requirements with residential organics recycling service to commence by April 1, 2023.
Staff is also working with Waste Management on a proposed contract extension that will incorporate the new
SB 1383 requirements. Proposed rate schedules and information were supplied to the City Council at the
January 17, 2023 Shirtsleeve meeting prior to mailing Proposition 218 protest hearing notices (English and
Spanish translations) and preliminary to a public hearing to consider adopting the proposed rate schedules for
the period from April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2028. The rate schedules set maximum limits on the solid
waste rates for the next five years, and each year the City Council will be requested to approve the actual rates
to be implemented. At the public hearing on March 15, 2023, the City Council will be asked to receive public
comment; adopt resolutions setting future adjustments to solid waste rates with limits for the period April 1,
2023 through March 31, 2028.
FISCAL IMPACT: Rate adjustments are needed in order to fund the State mandates of
Senate Bill 1383
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable
C�
Q Esr --0,-
Charles E. Swimiey, Jr.
Public Works Director
CES/TC/cd
APPROVED:
Stephen Schwabauer, City Manager
\\cvcfilv02\pubwks$\WP\Solid Waste\SB1383\CCPHProp218 docx 2/23/2023
*:1:1 Il k iV_%
W CITY OF LODI
MULTI -CART CURBSIDE REFUSE RATES
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
3. 96 GALLON WASTE CART 1X PER WEEK
1 Refuse Cart
Current
($51.31)
New
Services Offered
Monthly
Adjustment
Monthly
3 Refuse Carts
Rate
($153.96)
Rate
1. 64 GALLON REFUSE CART 1X PER WEEK (35 Gal Legacy Rate)
$16.95
$0.00
$16.95
1 Refuse Cart
$30.60
$5.00
$35.60
2 Refuse Carts
$76.48
($5.28)
$71.20
3 Refuse Carts
$122.37
($15.57)
$106.80
4 Refuse Carts
$168.31
($25.91)
$142.40
2. 64 GALLON REFUSE CART 1X PER WEEK
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
1 Refuse Cart
$46.06
($2.00)
$44.06
2 Refuse Carts
$115.04
($26.92)
$88.12
3 Refuse Carts
$184.01
($51.83)
$132.18
3. 96 GALLON WASTE CART 1X PER WEEK
1 Refuse Cart
$100.37
($51.31)
$49.06
2 Refuse Carts
$200.76
($102.64)
$98.12
3 Refuse Carts
$301.14
($153.96)
$147.18
4. DUPLEX AND MULTI -FAMILY, AND MOBILE HOMES
$16.95
$0.00
$16.95
Monthly rate is reduced one (1) dollar from above base rates
($1.00)
$0.00
($1.00)
5. 64 GALLON REFUSE USER 1X PER WEEK* (LEGACY 20 GAL LOW
VOLUME)
6.35 GAL SENIOR FIXED INCOME**
$0.00
$0.00
$30.60
7. ADDITIONAL 64 GALLON RECYCLING CARTS
$0.00
$12.38
$12.38
Second and Third Recycling Cart
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Fourth and Each Additional Cart
$16.54
$0.00
$16.54
8. ADDITIONAL 96 GALLON YARD AND GARDEN CARTS
Second and Third Yard and Garden Cart
$0.00
$0.00
Fourth and Each Additional Yard and Garden Cart
$16.54
$0.00
$16.54
9. BACKYARD SERVICE**
Monthly service charge
$16.95
$0.00
$16.95
Qualified Disabled
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
10. Overage - Waste, Recycling, and Organics Residential Carts***
Incidents 1 and 2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Incidents 3+
$0.00
$12.38
$12.38
11. Contamination - Recycling, and Organics Residential Carts***
Incidents 1 and 2
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Incidents 3+
$0.00
$15.02
$15.02
Notes:
*Applies to Single Family Dwellings Only
**Qualified and approved by City of Lodi Utility Department
***MSW cart may be automatically upsized after 3 incidents within a six (6) month period.
W CITY OF LODI
0
CONTAINER RATES
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
New Monthly Rates
WEEKLY SERVICE - ONE (1) CUBIC YARD CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK 3 X WK 4 X WK 5 X WK 6 X WK
1
$159.98
$297.61
$681.94
$1,230.74
$1,943.97
$2,821.63
2
$254.19
$463.74
$969.26
$1,672.16
$2,572.40
$3,669.95
3
$348.35
$629.77
$1,256.52
$2,113.53
$3,200.77
$4,518.23
4
$442.50
$795.83
$1,543.84
$2,554.93
$3,829.18
$5,366.57
5
$536.72
$961.90
$1,831.13
$2,996.38
$4,457.64
$6,214.80
6
$630.91
$1,127.98
$2,118.39
$3,437.80
$5,085.97
$7,063.11
7
$725.10
$1,294.11
$2,405.70
$3,879.19
$5,714.36
$7,911.41
8
$819.28
$1,460.11
$2,693.04
$4,320.53
$6,342.77
$8,759.72
9
$913.44
$1,626.26
$2,980.32
$4,761.98
$6,971.21
$9,608.01
10
$1,007.67
$1,792.31
$3,267.58
$5,203.38
$7,599.58
$10,456.24
WEEKLY SERVICE - TWO (2) CUBIC YARD CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK 3 X WK 4 X WK 5 X WK 6 X WK
1
$233.13
$439.35
$909.14
$1,554.62
$2,375.81
$3,372.64
2
$395.84
$738.20
$1,396.63
$2,265.99
$3,346.12
$4,637.15
3
$558.64
$1,036.97
$1,884.23
$2,977.40
$4,316.50
$5,901.64
4
$721.43
$1,335.84
$2,371.75
$3,688.78
$5,286.96
$7,166.15
5
$884.20
$1,634.52
$2,859.25
$4,400.16
$6,257.28
$8,430.63
6
$1,047.01
$1,933.38
$3,346.70
$5,111.59
$7,227.68
$9,695.18
7
$1,209.81
$2,232.20
$3,834.33
$5,822.93
$8,198.02
$10,959.60
8
$1,372.54
$2,531.02
$4,321.84
$6,534.33
$9,168.41
$12,224.18
9
$1,535.37
$2,829.82
$4,809.36
$7,245.71
$10,137.69
$13,488.64
10
$1,698.14
$3,128.57
$5,296.90
$7,957.08
$11,110.84
$14,753.16
WEEKLY SERVICE - THREE (3) CUBIC YARD CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK 3 X WK 4 X WK 5 X WK 6 X WK
1
$296.75
$562.30
$1,091.30
$1,795.94
$2,676.34
$3,732.42
2
$523.21
$983.95
$1,760.92
$2,748.67
$3,947.29
$5,356.73
3
$749.68
$1,405.70
$2,430.59
$3,701.43
$5,218.25
$6,981.01
4
$976.11
$1,827.39
$3,100.25
$4,654.15
$6,489.20
$8,605.33
5
$1,202.59
$2,249.11
$3,769.89
$5,606.97
$7,760.21
$10,229.64
6
$1,429.07
$2,670.76
$4,439.53
$6,559.68
$9,031.10
$11,853.94
7
$1,655.51
$3,091.97
$5,109.17
$7,512.38
$10,302.04
$13,478.26
8
$1,881.98
$3,514.17
$5,778.86
$8,465.11
$11,573.03
$15,102.55
9
$2,108.43
$3,935.92
$6,448.54
$9,417.87
$12,843.98
$16,726.86
10
$2,334.90
$4,357.59
$7,118.15
$10,370.60
$14,114.90
$18,351.11
W CITY OF LODI
0
CONTAINER RATES
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
WEEKLY SERVICE - FOUR (4) CUBIC YARD CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK 3 X WK 4 X WK 5 X WK 6 X WK
1
$360.46
$685.17
$1,273.44
$2,037.36
$2,976.96
$4,092.24
2
$650.58
$1,229.78
$2,125.18
$3,231.41
$4,548.48
$6,076.39
3
$940.72
$1,774.43
$2,976.99
$4,425.57
$6,120.02
$8,060.48
4
$1,230.90
$2,319.06
$3,828.81
$5,619.67
$7,691.62
$10,044.56
5
$1,521.01
$2,863.65
$4,680.55
$6,813.74
$9,263.17
$12,028.73
6
$1,811.19
$3,408.30
$5,532.39
$8,007.83
$10,834.66
$14,012.84
7
$2,101.36
$3,952.94
$6,384.22
$9,201.97
$12,406.17
$15,996.95
8
$2,391.55
$4,497.56
$7,235.99
$10,396.03
$13,977.72
$17,981.10
9
$2,681.67
$5,042.17
$8,087.76
$11,590.16
$15,549.32
$19,965.20
10
$2,971.88
$5,586.80
$8,939.54
$12,784.22
$17,120.83
$21,949.29
WEEKLY SERVICE - FIVE (5) CUBIC YARD CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK 3 X WK 4 X WK 5 X WK 6 X WK
1
$424.11
$808.08
$1,455.57
$2,278.66
$3,277.57
$4,452.04
2
$777.97
$1,475.58
$2,489.54
$3,714.21
$5,149.68
$6,795.95
3
$1,131.79
$2,143.16
$3,523.44
$5,149.66
$7,021.83
$9,139.95
4
$1,485.64
$2,810.70
$4,557.40
$6,585.12
$8,893.92
$11,483.89
5
$1,839.55
$3,478.27
$5,591.26
$8,020.59
$10,766.07
$13,827.81
6
$2,193.33
$4,145.77
$6,625.27
$9,456.05
$12,638.23
$16,171.73
7
$2,547.24
$4,813.30
$7,659.17
$10,891.56
$14,510.34
$18,515.65
8
$2,901.06
$5,480.83
$8,693.12
$12,326.99
$16,382.45
$20,859.61
9
$3,254.96
$6,148.41
$9,727.03
$13,762.48
$18,254.63
$23,203.55
10
$3,608.78
$6,815.97
$10,760.99
$15,197.91
$20,126.71
$25,547.46
WEEKLY SERVICE - SIX
(6) CUBIC YARD CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS
1 X WK
2 X WK
3 X WK
4 X WK
5 X WK
6 X WK
1
$487.77
$931.00
$1,637.73
$2,520.06
$3,578.14
$4,811.91
2
$905.31
$1,721.43
$2,853.74
$4,196.86
$5,750.86
$7,515.62
3
$1,322.86
$2,511.86
$4,069.83
$5,873.73
$7,923.53
$10,219.35
4
$1,740.37
$3,302.29
$5,285.87
$7,550.51
$10,096.28
$12,923.08
5
$2,157.90
$4,092.72
$6,501.93
$9,227.33
$12,268.95
$15,626.82
6
$2,575.42
$4,883.25
$7,718.00
$10,904.17
$14,441.67
$18,330.53
7
$2,992.94
$5,673.66
$8,934.03
$12,580.98
$16,614.41
$21,034.28
8
$3,410.43
$6,464.10
$10,150.12
$14,257.80
$18,787.06
$23,738.00
9
$3,827.98
$7,254.50
$11,366.22
$15,934.63
$20,959.80
$26,441.77
10
$4,245.57
$8,044.95
$12,582.25
$17,611.42
$23,132.47
$29,145.52
CITY OF LODI
CONTAINER RATES
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
WEEKLY SERVICE - 35 GALLON ORGANICS CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK*
1 $48.20
$96.38
2 $96.39
$192.76
3 $144.58
$289.14
4 $192.78
$385.52
5 $240.98
$481.90
WEEKLY SERVICE - 64 GALLON ORGANICS CONTAINER
# OF
CONTAINERS 1 X WK 2 X WK*
1 $72.51
$145.02
2 $145.02
$290.03
3 $217.53
$435.06
4 $290.03
$580.08
5 $362.55
$725.10
ANCILLARY SERVICES
Contamination $102.57
Available for customers with 4+ carts
WCITY OF LODI
0
10 TO 50 CUBIC YARD CONTAINERS
RATE STRUCTURE
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
PERMANENT HIGH FREQUENCY ROLL -OFF RATES
1. Drop-off and Pick-up Charge Per Box
2. Tons Disposed/Box X Processing Charge
ONE-TIME TEMPORARY USER ROLL -OFF RATES
1. Drop/off/Pick-up Charge Per Box
2. Tons Disposed/Box X Processing Charge
New
Current CPI Disposal Disposal Monthly
Rates Increase CPI Effect Increase Effect Rate
$212.86 0.000% $0.00 0.000% $0.00 $212.86
$47.94 0.000% $0.00 0.000% $0.00 $47.94
$270.29 0.000% $0.00 0.000% $0.00 $270.29
$47.95 0.000% $0.00 0.000% $0.00 $47.95
wCITY OF LODI
COMMERCIAL COMPACTOR RATES
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
2. 3 CUBIC YARD COMPACTOR
1X Week
Current
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
New
Services Offered
Monthly
CPI
$0.00
Disposal
Disposal
Monthly
3X Week
Rate
Increase
CPI Effect
Increase
Effect
Rate
1. 2 CUBIC YARD COMPACTOR
$1,775.61
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,775.61
1X Week
$359.24
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$359.24
2X Week
$718.51
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$718.51
3X Week
$1,077.75
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,077.75
4X Week
$1,437.03
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,437.03
5X Week
$1,796.26
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,796.26
2. 3 CUBIC YARD COMPACTOR
1X Week
$443.91
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$443.91
2X Week
$887.79
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$887.79
3X Week
$1,331.68
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,331.68
4X Week
$1,775.61
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,775.61
5X Week
$2,219.51
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$2,219.51
3. 4 CUBIC YARD COMPACTOR
1X Week
$529.22
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$529.22
2X Week
$1,058.44
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,058.44
3X Week
$1,587.68
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$1,587.68
4X Week
$2,116.91
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$2,116.91
5X Week
$2,646.14
0.000%
$0.00
0.000%
$0.00
$2,646.14
CITY OF LODI
10 TO 50 CUBIC YARD ROLL OFF* CONTAINERS
COMPACTOR RATE STRUCTURE
EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 2023 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2024
Current CPI Disposal Disposal
Rates Increase CPI Effect Increase Effect New Rates
TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT COMMERCIAL COMPACTOR RATES
1. Drop/off/Pick-up Charge Per Box $369.50 0.000% $0.00 0.000% $0.00 $369.50
2. Tons Disposed/Box X Processing Charge $47.77 0.000% $0.00 0.000% $0.00 $47.77
• This charge will be applied to loads that are serviced by "Roll Off' vehicles.
• This charge will be applied per load to self contained compaction containers or containers that attach to a charging unit for the purpose
of compaction in sizes on or about 10 to 50 cubic yards.
The City of Lodi
Public Works
PUUiic; nCar illy
Solid Waste Rates for Residential
Customers
Agenda Item G-1
March 15, 2023
SB 1383 - Basics
Overview
• SB 1383 - Mandated Service Changes
• Current Residential Rate Structure
Overages and Contamination Trends
• Community Outreach and Education
• Proposition 218 Rate Setting Process
Proposed Residential Rate Structure
• Additional Services
• Community Benefit
• Recommended Action
Public Hearing and Protest Procedures
BasicsSB 1383
• Passed in 2016
• Unfunded state -mandate
• Mandates organics recycling to reduce green house
gas emissions in landfills
• Goal: To reduce organics waste disposal by 75% by
2025
0 Failure to comply= penalties of up to $10,000 per day
f
SB 1383 — Mandated Service Changes
• Weekly organics waste collection service
• Color -coded cart lids / labels
• Reporting and route audits
• Enforcement
• Outreach and education
Current Residential Rate Structure
N%V
Current Residential Rates
• Incentivizes customers to choose smaller carts
• Results in overfilling
■ Trash in roadway / truck fires
• Results in contaminated recycling
■ Impacting City's diversion goals
Overfilled Carts by Size
July 11— Aug 8, 2022
96 -gal
10/-
64 -gal 0/-
64 -gal
33%
20 & 35 gal
20&35
gal
64%
54 -gal 0 96rgal
,qW
1 in 3 homes overfill their trash
I cart on a weekly basis
Lodi Recycling contamination rate is 38% by
weight. 1 in 8 homes are placing trash bags in
recycling carts
Y
Community Outreach and Education
City Council Shirtsleeve Meetings
March 15, 2022
August 9, 2022
January 17, 2023
Education Campaign
Educational Mailer
Social Media Digital Ads
Commercial Postcard
Educational Videos
LNS Newspaper Ads
Residential FAQ
Activity Guide Ads
Email Campaign
Grape Line Bus Ads
December 2021
July 2022 Ongoing
August 2022
September 2022 Ongoing
Jan 2023 — Apr 2023
February 2023
Spring 2023 Upcoming
Spring 2023 Upcoming
TBD Upcoming
Community Outreach and Education
In -Person Organics Workshops
Lodi Lions Club
Boys & Girls Club
Lodi Rotary
Loel Center
Lodi WorkNet Center
Public Library
Lodi Farmers Market
Sunrise Rotary
Visit Lodi
Jan 18,
2023
Completed
Jan 28,
2023
Completed
Feb 16,
2023
Completed
Feb 21,
2023
Completed
Mar 29,
2023
Upcoming
Apr 16,
2023
Upcoming
May —Aug 2023
Upcoming
TBD
Upcoming
TBD
Upcoming
Proposition 218 Rate Setting Process
• 45 -day notice
• Explain process
• Mailed to owners and renters
• English and Spanish
Outline basis of rate increase
• Outline how to file a protest
• One written protest per parcel will count
• Majority protest will null proposed rate increase
PrOlDosed Residential Rate Structure
Proposed Residential Rates
• Incentivizes customers to choose appropriately sized carts
• Reduces overfilling
■ Reduces trash in roadway / truck fires
• Improves recycling contents
■ Improves City's diversion goals
Proposed Residential Rate Structure
Proposed Residential Rates —Additional Information
• FREE backyard service with documented disability.
• Backyard service available for all for an additional rate of $16.95.
• Reduced rate available for current 20 and 35 gallon legacy rate
customers that qualify (low income seniors).
■ Qualifying low income seniors can request a 35 gallon cart at the current
rate $30.60.
■ Discounted low income senior rate subject to annual CPI increases.
• City and WM to meet and confer regarding effectiveness of cart
size after April 1, 2026.
Proposed Residential Rate Structure
Proposed Residential Overage and Contamination Charges
Overage —Criteria for Warning/Surcharge
Requirement for lid to be closed, 6-10"
above water line threshold for overage
incident.
Loose material left on sides of carts will result in
overage incident.
Contamination — Criteria for
Warning/Surcharge
10% threshold/standard size kitchen bag (13
gallons).
City may review a sampling of the audits during
the roll-out phase to assist with targeted
education.
No fees charged until January 2024!
Additional Services
• Weekly organics collection and additional routes added
beginning January 2024.
• 20 and 35 gallon customers will receive color -compliant 64
gallon cart at the proposed legacy rate by January 2024.
• New carts with color -compliant lids for existing 64 and 94 gallon
residents beginning January 2024.
• Food scraps and food -soiled paper can be placed in organics
carts NOW.
• Contamination and overage monitoring meeting state
requirements.
• Additional reporting and route audits.
• Additional education and outreach.
• Support for City enforcement of clean waste streams.
Community Benefits
r ,
• Increase existing Street Maintenance Fee by
$330,000, for a total annual amount of $1,085,603.
• New Downtown Maintenance Fee of $100,000
annually.
• Annual payment of $125,000 for City staff.
• All annual payments to be increased by the same
percentage as WM rates on an annual basis.
• One-time administrative fee of $1,000,000 to be paid
to the City in four annual payments of $250,000.
Public Hearing and Protest Procedure
• Open Public Hearing
• Public Comment
• Accept all Protests Submitted
• Close Public Hearing
• Ask Clerk to Tally Protests and Declare
Outcome
Recommended Action
Approve Resolution Setting Future Solid
Waste Rates Pursuant to Proposition 218
for Residential Customers as set forth in
Proposition 218 Notice and Proposed
Resolution
Questions?
Rosanne Christie, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Bonne Domer, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Roger Stafford, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
June Aaker, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Peggy Fleming, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for
Council (filed).
Toby Chandler, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for
Council (filed).
Judith G. Ladner, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waIte rates proposal.
Bill Hrovat, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for Council
(filed).
Katelyn Roedner, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Judith Hallisey, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Mono Geralis, a Waste Management employee, spoke regarding the need to comply with the State mandate and
urged the public not to blame the issue on Waste Management.
Barry Schoenborn, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
John Slaughterback, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Jennifer Shellenborn, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Dave Henchman, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
A member of the public, name not provided, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Frank Smart, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
City Manager Schwabauer and Alex Oseguera, Brad Cea, and Vanessa Barberis of Waste Management addressed
some of the concerns brought up by public comment, including the State law governing protest votes, the State's
assertion that less methane is produced by composting, the monopoly of utilities and the solicitation of other solid
waste collection providers, overseers of the process, mandatory solid waste collection for residents, meat products
and composting, public outreach, on -street auditing, organic workshops, adjustments for right -sizing, changes to the
contract in response to feedback, scheduled meet and confer, and the necessity of a new Proposition 218 hearing
process if the current rate structure (or lower) is not approved.
Council Member Nakanishi stated his concerns relate to the need for smaller carts and the equity of costs.
Discussion ensued with Council Member Bregman, Council Member Nakanishi, Mayor Pro Tempore Craig, City
Manager Schwabauer, Deputy City Manager Keys, Mr. Oseguera, and Mr. Cea regarding the process if the rates are
not accepted, City costs in relation to auditing and fining customers, the timeline to reach the current proposed
contract, rates compared to the City of Galt, weekly pickup required by the State mandate, benefits included in the
proposed contract, senior discount, difficulties with large carts, immediate upgrade to a larger cart following overage,
rate structure designed to benefit the majority, and phasing out of small carts.
Discussion ensued with Mayor Pro Tempore Craig, City Manager Schwabauer, and Public Works Director Swimley
regarding continuing the item to the April 5, 2023 Council meeting; choices of approving the recommended rates,
approving lesser rates, or starting a new Proposition 218 procedure; commercial rates being already in place;
temporary acceptance of rates; and the recommendation, including standardized carts, being the best solution for the
majority of customers.
Assistant City Clerk Farris reported that the number of protests received was 369, which is less than the required
10,356 protests needed, and the number of votes does not qualify as a majority protest.
There being no further public comments, Mayor Hothi closed the public hearing at 9:03.
Mayor Pro Tempore Craig made a motion, second by Council Member Nakanishi, to continue Item No. G-1 to April 5,
2023.
City Council Meeting March 15, 2023
Presented by Peggy Fleming
Acknowledge SB 1383 mandate without revenue from State
Acknowledge City Council Members/Waste Management efforts
Equitable distribution of costs associated with implementation of SB 1383
Equal distribution of associated costs/Galt and Stockton retained smaller carts
Compliance Issues related to SB 1383 : fines
Compliance Issues not directly related to SB 1383
Audit conducted 7 months ago by WM:overfilled/contaminated carts
Audit results not communicated to public prior to making the radical change
No opportunity for improvement prior to radical changes in Waste Management rates
Do NOT punish all 14K residents
***Non compliance results in automatic upgrade to larger cart and/or fines
Educational efforts and compliance punishment for repetitive non compliance
Give residents a chance to improve behavior of overfilling/contamination of recylcing
Do not make the decision to "value new rates" as a good thing for the 14 K residents
WM cannot determine the value the smaller cart is to the majority of us
Factors beyond price contribute to value of smaller carts. Price point does NOT equate value
My 20 gallon cart represents my smaller footprint, is way more than I need on a
weekly basis, and adds to my pride for contributing less to the landfill
Given my 5 Gallon waste for my 20 gallon verses my 5 gallon going into a 64 gallon cart
Giving a larger waste can can confuse some who are removing 75% of organic
waste and now have a waste container over 3 times the size of before. Remove 75% but increase
can size by 75% is totally confusing/ridiculous
Discarding all smaller waste containers, albeit recyclable, Increase costs to city
Why I prize/highly value my 20 gallon cart
Aligns with my desire for a smaller footprint/landfill aversion
My 20 gallon is My privilege/ no abuse of overfilling or contamination
Simple: I do not want/need/value/or deserve forced increase in cart size
Behavior Management/Modification
Inform and Educate prior to punishment
Those who continue to abuse privilege fine and auto upgrade larger cart
**Upset residents had no idea this was happening/no time to change behavior
Recommendations
Implement SB 3183 across the board equal costs since it is a State Mandate
Inform all residents of audit results/plan for implementing cart re -sizing if non compliance
Continue educational efforts by Waste Management/citing proposed violations/fines
Vote NO on implementing proposed Cart re -sizing plan/revisit in reasonable time frame
for Waste Management/city needs
Rosanne Christie, a member o- the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Bonne Domer, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Roger Stafford, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
June Aaker, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Peggy Fleming, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for
Council (filed).
Toby Chandler, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for
Council (filed).
Judith G. Ladner, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Bill Hrovat, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for Council
(filed).
Katelyn Roedner, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Judith Hallisey, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Mono Geralis, a Waste Management employee, spoke regarding the need to comply with the State mandate and
urged the public not to blame the issue on Waste Management.
Barry Schoenborn, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
John Slaughterback, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Jennifer Shellenborn, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Dave Henchman, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
A member of the public, name not provided, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Frank Smart, a member of the oublic, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
City Manager Schwabauer and Alex Oseguera, Brad Cea, and Vanessa Barberis of Waste Management addressed
some of the concerns brought up by public comment, including the State law governing protest votes, the State's
assertion that less methane is produced by composting, the monopoly of utilities and the solicitation of other solid
waste collection providers, ove,seers of the process, mandatory solid waste collection for residents, meat products
and composting, public outreach, on -street auditing, organic workshops, adjustments for right -sizing, changes to the
contract in response to feedback, scheduled meet and confer, and the necessity of a new Proposition 218 hearing
process if the current rate structure (or lower) is not approved.
Council Member Nakanishi stated his concerns relate to the need for smaller carts and the equity of costs.
Discussion ensued with Counc I Member Bregman, Council Member Nakanishi, Mayor Pro Tempore Craig, City
Manager Schwabauer, Deputy City Manager Keys, Mr. Oseguera, and Mr. Cea regarding the process if the rates are
not accepted, City costs in relation to auditing and fining customers, the timeline to reach the current proposed
contract, rates compared to the City of Galt, weekly pickup required by the State mandate, benefits included in the
proposed contract, senior discount, difficulties with large carts, immediate upgrade to a larger cart following overage,
rate structure designed to benefit the majority, and phasing out of small carts.
Discussion ensued with Mayor Pro Tempore Craig, City Manager Schwabauer, and Public Works Director Swimley
regarding continuing the item to the April 5, 2023 Council meeting; choices of approving the recommended rates,
approving lesser rates, or starting a new Proposition 218 procedure; commercial rates being already in place;
temporary acceptance of rates: and the recommendation, including standardized carts, being the best solution for the
majority of customers.
Assistant City Clerk Farris reperted that the number of protests received was 369, which is less than the required
10,356 protests needed, and the number of votes does not qualify as a majority protest.
There being no further public comments, Mayor Hothi closed the public hearing at 9:03.
Mayor Pro Tempore Craig made a motion, second by Council Member Nakanishi, to continue Item No. G-1 to April 5,
2023.
There is much information that needs to be available to the public.
What about residences that do not use a Green cart due to yard service? In
this case there would only be organic waste in the cart.
Could there possibly be a community cart somewhere to dump organic
waste.
How are Hotels, Restaurants, Food trucks, Apartments, Commercial,
Downtown businesses, Church events, Schools & Homeless trash dealing
with SB 1383?
What percent of methane gas is recovered under this plan?
Many are calling this an annual hidden tax for the City of Lodi.
What percentage of the $5.00 goes to Waste Management and what to the
City?
What programs are the City funding with this money?
The Annual Rate Increase should be brought before the City Council yearly.
Example of 64 gal and small bag of trash
I received this Public Hearing Notice: It says, "The City Council shall consider
adoption of a trash collection and recycling rate schedule for residential
services to take effect April 1St 23, as set forth in Table 1 below".
Without getting into all other aspects of this proposal. This Table
alone, shows in black & white that residents with high trash volume are
being rewarded, while the 14,000 residents that have low trash volume are
being penalized. m this table it also shows that this rate increase only
affects the 14,000 small cart customers. The EXTREME REDUCTION for the
96 gal. cart & the huge increase for the smaller cart is NOT an equitable
solution for Lodi Residents.
Now, let's address the reasoning behind this lopsided rate increase.....
Overfilled trash carts.
Waste management claims that 65% of the 20 & 35 gal carts are being
overfilled. This may be questionable but for this example, say it's true.
That leaves 4900 residents that are being put in the same category as the
65% of over fillers. By doing this these 4900 residents are basically being
fined for following all the rules & NOT overfilling their carts. This is
victimizing a segment of the community which is seniors, small households
& physically compromised.
It is wrong to punish those that are doing right.
This is not the solution!
I understand that it will take perhaps a year to replace our existing carts
and the equipment needed. During this time, we should educate how to
Implement 1383 & assess the reduction of trash and over filling. This should
have been started when the assessment was done seven months ago.
This would have given the community an opportunity for improvement.
One solution to overfilling is If a resident overfills any size cart, they
would automatically get bumped to the larger cart, hence they end up with
a cart suited for their household.
Assuming the 65% of overfilling is true for small carts, there must be a
percentage of overfilling for the 64gal cart. This is where revenue can be
increased without persecuting small cart users who are disposing their
trash correctly & not overfilling.
Value is broached in the Waste Management Information flyer.
It claims by forcing small cart users to take a 64 gal cart their value
increases. Absolutely not! At $44 per month, one gallon of trash per week
would cost $11 per gallon & not the skewed value of 68 cents per gallon that
Waste Management puts forth. It also states by reducing the cost of the
larger cart it makes it easier for residents to choose a cart based on need and
not economics. This statement is not considering the small cart user at all,
as these 4900 residents are NOT given a choice for their smaller needs.
Please also consider the biggest value to these 4900 residents That IS the
cart size its self and maneuverability.
Galt and Stockton have both retained their small carts. Lodi needs to do the same.
Considering the inequitable pricing and the forcing of larger carts to
those who do not violate the rules. I sincerely ask each council
member for a NO vote this evening. Let this plan go back to the table
and correct these issues so it reflects the needs of the entire
community.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Toby Chandler
Rosanne Christie, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Bonne Domer, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Roger Stafford, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
June Aaker, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Peggy Fleming, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for
Council (filed).
Toby Chandler, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for
Council (filed).
Judith G. Ladner, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Bill Hrovat, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal and provided a handout for Council
(filed).
Katelyn Roedner, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Judith Hallisey, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Mono Geralis, a Waste Management employee, spoke regarding the need to comply with the State mandate and
urged the public not to blame the issue on Waste Management.
Barry Schoenborn, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
John Slaughterback, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Jennifer Shellenborn, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Dave Henchman, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
A member of the public, name not provided, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
Frank Smart, a member of the public, spoke against the solid waste rates proposal.
City Manager Schwabauer and Alex Oseguera, Brad Cea, and Vanessa Barberis of Waste Management addressed
some of the concerns brought up by public comment, including the State law governing protest votes, the State's
assertion that less methane is produced by composting, the monopoly of utilities and the solicitation of other solid
waste collection providers, overseers of the process, mandatory solid waste collection for residents, meat products
and composting, public outreach, on -street auditing, organic workshops, adjustments for right -sizing, changes to the
contract in response to feedback, scheduled meet and confer, and the necessity of a new Proposition 218 hearing
process if the current rate structure (or lower) is not approved.
Council Member Nakanishi stated his concerns relate to the need for smaller carts and the equity of costs.
Discussion ensued with Council Member Bregman, Council Member Nakanishi, Mayor Pro Tempore Craig, City
Manager Schwabauer, Deputy City Manager Keys, Mr. Oseguera, and Mr. Cea regarding the process if the rates are
not accepted, City costs in relation to auditing and fining customers, the timeline to reach the current proposed
contract, rates compared to the City of Galt, weekly pickup required by the State mandate, benefits included in the
proposed contract, senior discount, difficulties with large carts, immediate upgrade to a larger cart following overage,
rate structure designed to benefit the majority, and phasing out of small carts.
Discussion ensued with Mayor Pro Tempore Craig, City Manager Schwabauer, and Public Works Director Swimley
regarding continuing the item to the April 5, 2023 Council meeting; choices of approving the recommended rates,
approving lesser rates, or starting a new Proposition 218 procedure; commercial rates being already in place;
temporary acceptance of rates; and the recommendation, including standardized carts, being the best solution for the
majority of customers.
Assistant City Clerk Farris reported that the number of protests received was 369, which is less than the required
10,356 protests needed, and the number of votes does not qualify as a majority protest.
There being no further public comments, Mayor Hothi closed the public hearing at 9:03.
Mayor Pro Tempore Craig made a motion, second by Council Member Nakanishi, to continue Item No. G-1 to April 5,
2023.
.]�,U .,�
Fi
i
d
y
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED BY EMAIL
Section 1 - Public Hearing for Solid Waste Rates
Section 2 - Council Vacancy
SECTION 1
From: Betty Wilson
To: City Council Comments
Subject: Re: Proposed Rate increase Refuse Rate Adjustments effective April 12023
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 12:29:58 PM
Attachments: image001.Dna
Hello- although we are not happy about another price increase we understand this is a State
law and not much the city jurisdiction can do. BUT we do think allowing more flexible with
cart size could be something that could be done by the City. We are pretty confident most
citizens could use the 20 or 35 gallon cart which is cheaper.
Especially since the carts will be picked up weekly -my understanding.
Also to be sure WM has given us a loyalty consideration would also be helpful.
Let me know if you have any questions. I wish I could come but could not change my other
commitment.
Warm Regards,
Betty Wilson blwilson777@msn.com
From: Pamela Farris <pfarris@lodi.gov> on behalf of City Council Comments
<councilcomments@lodi.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 9:52 AM
To: Betty Wilson <blwilson777@msn.com>
Subject: RE: Proposed Rate increase Refuse Rate Adjustments effective April 12023
You're welcome.
I will provide your comments to Council before the meeting,
Your email does not say that you're protesting, but just to be transparent, please note that emails
are not considered formal protests under Prop 218 and will not be counted as formal protests during
the Public Hearing. Formal protests of the Waste Management refuse rate adjustment must be
submitted in the form of a mailed or hand -delivered letter to the attention of the City Clerk. Mailed
or hand -delivered letters of protest will be counted as formal protests during the Public Hearing on
March 15h, even if the protester is unable to attend the Public Hearing.
Please let me know if you have any questions,
Have a great day.
Pam
From: Betty Wilson <blwilson777@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 9:46 AM
To: City Council Comments <councilcomments@lodi.gov>
Subject: Re: Proposed Rate increase Refuse Rate Adjustments effective April 12023
Thank you for your confirmation.
Betty Wilson blwilson777(@msn.com
From: Pamela Farris <pfarris(@lodi.gov> on behalf of City Council Comments
<councilcomments(@lodi.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 9:17 AM
To: Betty Wilson <blwilson777(cDmsn.com>
Subject: RE: Proposed Rate increase Refuse Rate Adjustments effective April 12023
Thank you for your email. It will be provided to Council.
Pamela M. Farris, MMC
Assistant City Clerk
P.O. Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241-1910
(209) 333-6702 (209) 333-6807 FAX
Website: www.lodi.gov
city OF
o l
From: Betty Wilson <blwilson777(@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 9:16 AM
To: City Council Comments <oouncjlcommentsPlodi.gov>
Subject: Fw: Proposed Rate increase Refuse Rate Adjustments effective April 12023
Thank -you email below.
From: Betty Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 7:44 AM
To: cityclerkPlodi.gov <cityclerk(@lodi.gov>
Subject: Proposed Rate increase Refuse Rate Adjustments effective April 12023
Hello-
I am unable to attend the meeting on March 15th in person due to another conflict. But two
things I am asking City staff to be sure they have shopped the services with other providers
and we are getting the best rates. We have had WM for a long time and I would hope there
would be consideration on their part for our business.
Also, I am asking the City to evaluate smaller size containers for residents. I am confident the
majority of our citizens would not use that big of a container.
Thank -you,
Betty Wilson blwilson777[4�msn.com
Address: 1010 W Tokay Street
Lodi CA 95240
From: Carolyn Ross
To: City Council Comments
Subject: Comments on Proposed Solid Waste Collection Rates Increases for Lodi Residential Customers
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 1:23:31 PM
I'm a long-time Lodi resident, a 75 -year-old widow with hip replacements, and living alone
in my home. I have been using one of the small 20 -gallon trash carts for more than a year.
Here are the reasons:
I can move the cart, full or empty, up and down my angled driveway without great
difficulty. This is not the case with the larger Recycle and Garden waste carts, with
which I struggle.
• I have only one small bag of trash in any given week. I NEVER fill more than half of
this small trash container.
• I save almost $10/month on my rates. This is not inconsequential for fixed-income
retirees.
There are 30 homes in my small, gated community. In 17 of those homes, a single person
lives alone. Most are also elderly. We neighbors have spoken about this proposed
swapping for very large carts and the accompanying rate increases. This makes no sense
to any of us. Another huge cart is unwanted, unneeded, and will add a financial and
physical burden.
If the reason for eliminating the small carts is because a few customers overfill them, then
warn, fine, and swap out small -for -large carts in those cases only. Do not penalize all of us
for the abuses of a few.
I strongly object to the proposal on these grounds.
Thank you,
Carolyn Ross
146 Rivergate Place, Lodi, CA 95240
From: George Kennadv
To: City Council comments
Subject: Item G-1,"NO!"
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 1:42:32 PM
Punishes poor and seniors who already struggle!! Whoever came up with `forcing' for more service than needed
should run for president of Hell!!
Shame on whoever came up with such trash!! I know it was not this City! Send a message to Sacramento to keep
their noses out of my crap!!
Sent from my iPhone
From: D Hensel
To: City Council Comments
Subject: Resolution G-1, Public Hearing March 15, 2023
Date-, Wednesday, March 15, 2023 3:50:16 PM
Dear Council Members,
My comment is related to the Waste Management (WM) proposal to increase the cost and size
of waste containers for households who currently use smaller containers. I use a small
container. If I need a larger one, I would and should expect to pay more for it. This is very
similar to other services and products we use and consume. The more we use the more we
pay. While it may be an easy way for WM to deal with households that overload their
containers I do not think it is fair and or equitable. Basically the proposal is a subsidy for
households who need a bigger container but have not took the initiative to deal with it
themselves or have not been encouraged or made to do so by WM.
I also do not think it is good governance or policy to approve such a proposal. Governance
should be fair, equitable and reasonable. I believe the proposal fails on fair and equitable
because it is a subsidy. If WM needs to raise rates to comply with state law that is a very
different discussion and should again be equitable across the users of the service based on the
quantity of use.
Thank you for considering my comment.
Best regards,
Doug Hensel
2591 Greenfield Lane
Lodi, CA 95242
From: Anthony Sutter
To: City Council Comrrrents
Subject: Fwd: Garbage Rate Increase Formal Protest
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 3:44:14 PM
Also sent to the City Clerk's Office.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Anthony Sutter <anthony.sutter@gmail.com>
Date: March 15, 2023 at 3:40:25 PM PDT
To: cityclerk@lodi.gov
Subject: Garbage Rate Increase Formal Protest
Hello -
My wife and I will be at the council meeting tonight, but I just wanted to lodge
our formal disagreement on the garbage rate increases.
I do not have a problem paying more for the increased frequency of green can
pick ups, but forcing us to a larger sized garbage can (we currently have a 35
gallon size) is frustrating and unnecessary. This is especially true given that the
point of SB 1383 was to reduce the amount of material that ended up in landfills.
We rarely fill our current garage can, so a larger one is completely unnecessary.
The City and Waste Management's attempt to roll this removal of smaller
garbage cans into the green can/organic waste issue is misleading. Conflating
these two items (green waste and increased garbage can size) is irresponsible. If
Waste Management wants to remove the smaller cans, it should be a separate item
of discussion. They should be forced to discuss it fully, not just incorrectly blame
it on SB 1383 and the extra green can pick ups.
- Anthony Sutter & Katelyn Roedner
1121 S School Street, Lodi, CA, 95240
From: John Halligan
To: City Council Comments
Subject: Waste Management Rate Increase - Agenda Item G-1 of March 15, 2023 City Council Meeting Agenda
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 4:43:56 PM
Lodi City Council Members/City of Lodi Administration,
I am writing to protest Resolution G-1 related to the Waste Management Proposal for rate increases to accommodate
weekly pick-up of organic waste because I do not believe the City of Lodi and/or the City Council have done
adequate due diligence by factoring in the significant amount of subsides Waste Management receives from the CA
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) on an annual basis into the rate negotiations with
Waste Management associated with this proposal.
Per public notice from CalRecycle, effective July 1, 2022 Waste Management's registered curbside program for the
City of Lodi receives the following commingled CRV rate for every pound of CRV curbside program material they
collect from residents in the City of Lodi:
Aluminum - $1.62
Glass - $0.037
PETE - $0.62
HDPE - $0.033
Additionally, Waste Management receives the following processing payments from CalRecycle for every pound of
CRV curbside material the collect from the residents in the City of Lodi:
rocessine Pavments
Glass - $0.08707
PETE - $0.08525
HDPE - $0.42
Additionally, Waste Management is able to sell the CRV beverage containers they collected from the residents of
the City of Lodi on the commodities market for the scrap value of the respective CRV beverage container type:
Aver.1Ve Scrap Value -Wer Ton) on December 2022:
Aluminum - $1,150
PETE - $139.45
HDPE - $271.76
i.urusiae auppiemenimi raymcniLm
Additionally, Waste Management's registered curbside program receive a portion of the $10.5 million annual
curbside supplemental payment. This payment is also based on the total weight of the CRV beverage containers
they collected from the residents of the City of Lodi.
As a former employee of CalRecycle, I know for a fact that these payments and subsidies add up to millions of
dollars a year for Waste Management programs implemented for the City of Lodi.
This data is available upon written request to CalRecycle, for virtually and time period/time frame. Unfortunately
the statute that allows for local jurisdictions to request and obtain this information is protected as proprietary
business data and cannot be disclosed to the public, unless certain conditions are met. The statue can be found in the
Public Resources Code, Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Section. The code section is below for your ease
of reference:
CHAPTER 4. Reporting [14550 -14556] ( Chapter 4 added by Stats. 1986, Ch. 1290, Sec. 2. )
14551.4. The department shall make available the information collected pursuant to
subdivision (a) of Section 14551, concerning the volumes of materials collected from
certified recycling centers, only to a governmental agency that requests the
information, including a city or county, or an entity specifically designated by the city
or county to receive the information if the entity requests the information, if all of the
following conditions are met:
(a) The request is made in writing.
(b) All information provided by the department is provided using the aggregate
amounts collected in the city or county unless the city or county, or an entity
specifically designated by the city or county to receive the information, requests the
information provided by each individual certified recycling center.
(c) All information provided to the governmental agency, including a city or county,
or an entity specifically designated by the city or county to receive the information, is
considered proprietary and confidential in nature and protected in accordance with
the requirements of subdivision (b) of Section 14551 of the Public Resources Code,
Section 14554 of the Public Resources Code, and paragraph (5) of subdivision (c) of
Section 7921.505 of the Government Code.
(Amended by Stats. 2021, Ch. 615, Sec. 376. (AB 474) Effective January 1, 2022.
Operative January 1, 2023, pursuant to Sec. 463 of Stats. 2021, Ch. 615.)
My question is, has the City of Lodi and/or the City Council requested this data for Waste Management curbside
program that they have registered for collection in the City of Lodi? This information should be obtained,
referenced and used by the City when negotiating in good faith with Waste Management when the solid waste
contract is up for renewal and/or whenever rate increases are being proposed, such as they are now recycling and
collection of organics. In my opinion, this is the minimum due diligence that should be done in all such
circumstances before potentially unnecessary and exorbitant fees are imposed upon the citizens of Lodi.
John Halligan
1107 Green Oaks Way
Lodi, Ca
209 366-4586
SUBJECT:
Please immediately confirm receipt
of this fax by calling 333-6702
CITY OF LODI
P. O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION SETTING
FUTURE SOLID WASTE RATES PURSUANT TO PROPOSITION 218 FOR
RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS
PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2023
IR ZIC1,
TEAR SHEETS WANTED: One (1) please
SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: OLIVIA NASHED, CITY CLERK
LNS ACCT. #5100152 City of Lodi
P.O. Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
DATED: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2023
ORDERED BY: OLIVIA NASHED
CITY CLERK
PAMELA M. FARRIS KAYLEE CLAYTON
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
Emailed to the Sentinel at legals@lodinews.com at (:1 1 {time) on
forms\advins.doc
es)
X0,F
DECLARATION OF POSTING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION SETTING FUTURE
SOLID WASTE RATES PURSUANT TO PROPOSITION 218 FOR RESIDENTIAL
CUSTOMERS
On Thursday, February 23, 2023, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a
copy of a Notice of Public Hearing to consider resolution setting future solid waste rates
pursuant to Proposition 218 for residential customers (attached hereto, marked Exhibit
"A") was posted at the following locations:
Lodi City Clerk's Office
Lodi City Hall Lobby
Lodi Carnegie Forum
WorkNet Office
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 23, 2023, at Lodi, California.
PAMELA M. FARRIS
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
ORDERED BY:
OLIVIA NASHED
CITY CLERK
KAYLEE CLAYTON
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
\\cvcflv0l\administration$\Administration\CLERK\Agenda\City Council\Public
Hearings\AFFADAVITS\DECPOST 1. DOC
` CITY OF LODI
d Carnegie Forum
�. 305 West Pine Street, Lodi
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: March 15, 2023
Time: 7:00 p.m.
For information regarding this notice please contact:
Olivia Nashed
City Clerk
Telephone: (209) 333-6702
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HIEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, March 15, 2023, at the hour of
7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will
conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider
the following item:
a) Adopt resolution setting future solid waste rate schedules pursuant
to Proposition 218.
Information regarding this item was mailed to all property owners and utility customers
at 45 days prior to the hearing. Information may be obtained in the Public Works
Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6706. All interested persons are
invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements and
protests may be filed with the City Clerk, City Hall, 221 West Pine Street, 2nd Floor, Lodi,
95240, at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements and
protests may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in
issues you or someone else raised at
written correspondence delivered to the
the close of the public hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Olivia Nashed
City Clerk
Dated: February 23, 2023
Approved as to forni:
Janice D. Magdich
City Attorney
court, you may be limited to raising only those
the public hearing described in this notice or in
City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to
AVISO: Para obtener ayuda interpretativa con esta noticia, por favor Ilame a la oficina de la
Secretaria Municipal, a las (209) 333-6702.
CLERK\PUBHEAR\NOTICESINotPW 218SolidWasle 2123/23