HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 15, 2023 PublicCommentEmailPUBLIC 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
SECTION 2
From: Isabel Ochoa
To: City Council Comments
Subject: Support for Ramon Yepez
Date: Monday, March 6, 2023 11:25:40 PM
Hello,
My name is Isabel Ochoa and as a concerend resident of district 4 I would like to support the
appointment Ramon yepez to city council.
Sincerely,
Isabel Ochoa
From: Arianna Yenez
To: City Council Camments
Subject: Comment - Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Vacant Seat on the City Council
Date: Monday, March 6, 2023 8:39:29 PM
In regards to providing direction on staffing the vacant position on district 4 and as a district 4
resident, I would like for you to consider appointing a successor.
More specifically I would encourage you to consider Ramon Yepez who was the candidate
than received the second highest votes during the 2020 election.
Thank you for your consideration
District 4 resident, Arianna Yepez
Reim Leena Te
Tru
Degr MWdpY. Mt!GF IL STs%1�2.R�
I —tdd like in) tole count, I %,,I d for rmnon ycl„a.
Lodi City Council, District 4
Candidate Total Votes % Votes
Shak Khan 837 37.5%
Ramon Yepez 555 24.9%
Joanne L. Mounce 473 21.2%
Nati Bowman 363 16.3%
Write-in 2 0.1%
From: Crisitna Yeoez
To: City Council Comments
Subject: Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Vacant Seat on the City Council (CA)
Date: Monday, March 6, 2023 5:02:53 PM
Attachments: Letter,odf
Sent from my Whone