The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Report - March 16, 1994 (48)CIN OF LODI I I COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: Proposed Residential and Ccmmercial Refuse irate increase MEETING DATE: March 16, 1994 PREPARED BY: Assistant City Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council consider the request for a rate adjustment submitted by Sanitary Disposal Incorporated for refuse service in the City of Lodi. Such adjustment to be effective for all bills prepared after April 1, 1994. BACKGROUND: In December of 1991 the City Council adopted a "rate methodology" to be used to compute refuse rates for Sanitary City Disposal Company. After the first test year the rate would be adjusted on an annual basis --the first year being a full review of the costs associated with collection and disposal of residential and commercial refuse and the second year being an adjustment for inflation and costs associated with increased levels of service. April 1994 begins the second year of a complete cycle. I have reviewed the request submitted by Sanitary City and find the proposal to be in accordance with the agreed upon adjustments with one exception. In the proposal there is a request for an automated inventory system which had not been discussed in pzevious years. Even though this system may generate savings in the future it is a request not in conformance with my understanding of the adopted review mechanism. If this expenditure were not allowed then the increased rate would be 8.09 rather than 8.5t. As explained by Ms. Cindy Kline, of Barakat and Chamberlain, the main reason for the increase is not increased salaries or inflation, it is to pay for the costs of operating the material recovery facility for a full year. Over one half the requested increase is a direct result of the costs of operating the Material Recovery Facility for a full year. This includes not only the cost of labor but of depreciation, and interest on the facility itself. In accordance with the agreed upon procedure Sanitary City is entitled to a rate increase of 8.0t effective April 1, 1994. Therefore the cost of the normal residential service would be $15.87 per month (versus the current $14.70, an increase of $1.17 per month) and rates for commercial would increase by 8.0t. APPROVE THOMAS A. PETERSON ncre4d Peow ` Cfty Manage [K!ID �J RAIDING: Not applicable JIG/pn RIFUS894 /TXM. OIV Respectfully submitted, <�," I- ,'� J L. tilenn •ietant City Manager ORDn umn No. 1590 40 afifiitftlff!!flif AN DPCODIFIED URGENCY ORDI1013 CE OF THS .CITY C0018CIL OF TNR CITY OF LORI, REPEALING ORDn APCE iS70 IN ITS EPTIRETY, AND ESTABLISHIPG NEW RATES FOR RESIDEPTM SOLID WASTE COLLECTION. asasaaaaaaasasaasafaasaasaafaaiaifaaaataaaf ataaaaaasaaaasaaafaaaaaaaaaf BS IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Ordinance 1570 is repealed in its entirety. SECTION 2. Pursuant to Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 13.16 - SOLID WASTE - as it relates to residential solid waste collection, the following monthly ratbs are hereby established: A. For any private dwelling house or residence, the rate for one weekly garbage collection shall be: 1. For the first 38 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, not exceeding sixty pounds, Fifteen Dollars and Eighty Seven Cents ($15.87); 2. For the second 38 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, not exceeding sixty pounds each, Thirty Nine Dollars and Sixty Eight Cents ($39.68); 3. For the third 38 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, not exceeding sixty pounds each, Sixty Three Dollars and Forty Eight Cents ($63.48); 4. For one 20 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, Ten Dollars and Eighty Cents ($10.80). -1- -_-.--.�_.-�..•e--.----�.r...—w.. ,..,-r....nw•..... ...anc+:�,.., -..� ..... ..-..... -....�v.w+.wY.-..;.Yx•rYAs+rl+.:�wP.•cN�[:+:Yar o►sa�'Arw�n: b-v'�'evvt<�pK'`"+=�",�`',�''?'.o„�.' f. �`-�"�i'�.i"3,'�' W, W S. Owners or occupants of flats, apartments, mobile home spaces or the tenants or lessees thereof shall pay an amount equal to Fifteen Dollars and Righty Seven Cents ($15.87) times the number of apartment units or mobile home spaces owned. Bin services requested shall be charged according to the Commercial Rate structure, but in no event shall the City bili the tenants more than the single cart rate. C. For any residence requesting "backyard service" for the collection of their waste cart (a), there shall be an additional rate of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per month, unless the residence is granted an exemption from the rate by the Citizen's Advisory Board. D. For any residence requesting a commingled reryclables cart(s) and/or a yard/garden waste cart(s), sufficient to meet its waste diversion needs, there shall be no additional charge. E. Any residential customer may purchase from the City or the franchisee for the price of Five Dollars ($5.00) each, especially marked tags for affixing to trash bags which will then be collected with routine waste removal service. Such tags may be used to supplement, but not in lieu of other required solid waste collection services for residences. F. Rates set forth in this Ordinance shall be effective on all bills which are prepared on or after April 1, 1994. -2- __. _ _ ....».....�....... ......_,. ...,.. -..--...�.......ww.....v.wuws�.s•sati4a+►I.vM•w1•i.,:•-t+artr•.:� u�>tV:<l+NJ?l: Y M.. 3ECTIOM 3. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. SEC7IM4 4. This is an urgency ordinance under Government Code Sections 36934, and is based an health, safety and welfare considerations arising from the need to collect appropriate fees for waste removal. SECTION 5. This urgency ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinel", a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take of fact immediately. ,SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lodi hereby finds and declares pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 that such rates are necessary and reasonable for the usual operating expenses of the franchisee, including employee wages and benefits and for the purpose of purchasing facilities, equipment and materials necessary to implement and carry out a Council -mandated recycling program, and for other health and safety purposes. Attest: JENNIFER M. PERRIN City Clerk Approved this 16th day of March 1994 JACK A. SIEGLOCK MAYOR -3- ..-w.�..�.n.-..� �._...... ...... _._.. � —��._. .. ........ .... .. ..�........... ..... .. ...-.r.n t.s+fWnra•+_"�.�a.�.r.m}^..pl+ PA t ��Jl ry�� State of California County of San Joaquin, on. 1, Jennifer M. Perrin, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1590 was adopted as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lod.{ held March 16, 1994, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Noes: Council Members - Absent: Council Members - Abstain: Council Members - I further certify that Ordinance No. 1590 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. Approved as to Form BOBBY W. MCNATT City Attorney ORD2590/TXTA.02V -4- JENNIFER M. PERRIN City Clerk .. ._.... .--�.�._. __._. �..._..�..._.__,..-._. _.. .. __•_ _._. _.._ ......'.___. _. ..-.._......-......__....:...._......-...vr++a.,.....m�.r�.,,v,�. .a.�r...avJ9e�p. � E&c37i MODIFICATION TVAGREEMENT THIS. MODIFICATION TO THE AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER T, 1988 (The Agreement) is entered into this JSi4- day of1991 by and between the parties to the original agreement. All terms of the original agreement,, save and except those additionsp deletions, and modifications specified herein shall continue. RECITALS w....... Paragraph 25 of the original Agreement (Collection Rates) shall be modified to read as follows: The City shall have the right to detend ne the rates contractor may charge to customers for refuse collection and transportation services. The rates established shall be reviewed annually'during the month of September and, if appropriate, adjusted effective October 1. In its determination of any appropriate rate adjustments, the City Council may consider, by not be limited to, the change in the Consumer Price Index and/or other indices deemed appropriate for the past twelve months, and/or any extraordinary increases or decreases in the cost of equipment, insurance, fuel. Federal, State and/or local government taxes, fees, assessments, or other special costs. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have set their hands the date and year first mentioned above. CITY OF LODI Thomas A. Peterson City Manager Approved As To Form: Batt, City Attorney ORD1522/TXTA.02J Attest: Alice M. Reimc eCity Clerk ORDII H 62 I- NO. 1591 . AN DpCODIFIBD ORGIM ORDI2 " ' I OF THE CITY COOV1CIL OF THE CITY OF LODI RSTABLISHING WN RATES FOR COMWWXAL SOLID UM COLLECTION, AND RSpHALINIS ORDIRAIQCB NO. 1571 IN ITS MMRSTY. ff!■slififlffssssssisfsslfisfflf!!!lffslff ffaf!lffffff■fff!lffs!!!f!f!f BS IT ORDAnm sY THE CITY COOIiCIL OF TH8 CITY OF LODI AS FOLZONS : SECMoH i. Ordinance No. 1571 is repealed in it■ entirety. SECTIOH_ Z. Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 13.16 - SOLID MASTS - as it relates to cc merrial solid waste collections monthly rates is hereby amended to read as follows: Monthly rates. A. The monthly rates to be charged for garbage collections service shall be as follows: 1. For owners or tenants of business houses, the monthly rates shall be: A. As set forth in the Commercial Rate Structure schedule attached, when commercial bin service is requested. b. Fifty Five Dollars and Fifty Cents ($55.50) per month for once per week collection, when a commercial waste cart provided by the contractor of ninety-five gallons and not to exceed one hundred and fifty pounds is requested. -1- C. FOAL 38 gallon waste cart collecOonce per week, Fifteen Dollars and Nighty Sewn Cents ($iS.87) per month= for two 36 gallon waste carts, Thirty Sine Dollars and Sixty Sight Cents ($39.68) per month= and for three 38 gallon waste carts, Sixty Three Dollars and Forty Night Cents ($63.48) per month. B. All of the rate schedules set forth in this section shall be effective on all bilis which are prepared an or after April 1, 1994. SBCTIOS 3. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. SECTION 4- This is an urgency ordinance under Govermnent Code Section 36934, and is based on health, safety and welfare considerations arising from the need to collect appropriate fees for waste removal. SECTION 5. This urgency ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinel', a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect immediately. SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lodi hereby finds and declares pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 that such rates are necessary and reasonable for the usual operating expenses of the franchisee, including employee wages and benefits and for the purpose of purchasing facilities, equipment and materials necessary to implement and carry out a Council -mandated recycling program, and for other health and safety purposes. -2- Adft Approved this 16Ap o! March 1999 JACK A. SINGLOCK M#YOR Attest: JBNNIvim M. PSRRIN City Clerk State of California County of San Joaquin, on. 1, Jennifeic M. Perrin, City Clark of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1591 was adopted as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held March 16, 1996, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Noes: Council Members - Absent: Council Members - Abstain: Council Members - I further certify that Ordinance No. 1591 was approved and signed by the Mayor an the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. Approved as to Form BOBBY W. McNAZT City Attorney -3- JENNIFER M. PBRRIN City Clerk MPR-10-17A iG=13 FROM D WMT 8 QlAtltlEUH INC M 91 GW?--'J�9MIO P.002AM LAA;u COO1pACIN1Rift cz. Apq 1.1994 TW capacity 1=faquanoy l wa * of CanWAnwa 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 z a 4 a is 7 a 9 111 2 a 4 6 8 10 12 14 to l8 20 3 3 8 9 12 t5 16 21 24 27 30 504.49 $195 9 $46125 SOV -73 S1,31GN $101746 $14.1.59 MAY $6$314 $1.114.00 :1.731.42 $VAM .z11 $102.77 UK" $91425 SIAGIA9 $2.145,96 :3.041,17 3242.11/ $494.01 5096.38 61669.82 $2.061.72 511,1914.73 $291.25 SMO $1.17787 SIX&* U,1r7S,97 $4,19050 1340.49 $690.96 $1.85836 $?.26406 $3,3=1 94.746.26 $309.71 $770.44 91.540.87 52.39011 $300717 W31205 $436.96 $077.92 S1.7" 52.8 AS $4,t=l $S.W.?Il "at9 1618.40 51 1:68 $3,12424 $4,WAG SS."S.65 $WAS $1.07486 W0038 98,41130 SSMAI $?.90831 $132.27 ;264.54 $566.76 5079.03 S1,,t K14 $2,145,29 $219A6 $430.95 $601.19 St At8 W Mill -16 $2,9,9.90 =306.70 9613.36 S1.15682 91.551:!6 52.718.17 $3.73250 $399.90 $MAI $1.45204 V.MW 63.321.19 $4026.11 $481.11 $962.92 S1.747.47 S2.73SA7 !302631 :6,810.71 $568.52 S1, US5 6204289 $3.174A2 !4.551.23 Wit= $655.54 $1,311.07 12.336.32 $3.6/3.37 $5,13634 $8,60M $742.75 $1.485.50 $2,633.74 $4,05234 $5,741.26 ;7.700.53 1629.98 $1,65991 $029.18 $4491.29 $6,3;6.27 $6,49.13 $.917.16 $1.834.34 $3.22460 $4.95034 $6.95180 $9,287.74 $170.24 $340.49 5678.68 $1,131.69 S1.606Af $2.373.13 $295.43 $590.65 91.089.04 31,72230 $2.400.69 $3.39438 $420.61 $841.29 S1,498.38 92,313.23 $3.206.78 $4.416.02 3545.80 $1.091.99 $1.907.72 $2.904.06 34 080.56 $5,437.47 $670.98 51.341.97 32,317.07 $3,494.93 $4.075.55 $6.468.91 SMA7 $1.59233 32.726.42 $1,085,78 S5.670A4 $7.460.97 $921.35 $1,64171 $3.135.77 $4.676.64 56,465.32 $8.50121 $1.046.53 5209307 53.545.11 $5.967.40 67.2 M 59.623.26 $1,171.72 $2.343,44 $3,954.47 $5.856.34 $8.055.49 $10,544.71 $1.296.91 $2.593.81 S4.363.8f $6.44.019 98,649.98 $11.566.15 MAR -10-1994 15:01 P.02 tM-10-199<I iG:14 FRO" MFWAT 8 CFWfWLIN INC TO 912MM3GW?-940:$10 P.003J003 LSCD ihoposnd Rt/» MhC1M = April 1,1!!4 TOM C9p9Cig1 FratquM j ! WOOk a Contakwo 1 2 , 4 5 6 4 4 $2wm 6416A3 $70390 $1.28343 $1JM•87 8'!.800.18 a $271.37 $74276 stAlo87 826Q$.1a $?.87003 #3,890.26 12 $$1435 $IA88.08 ;1,MQ14 33,76661 $1666.16 86696.56 16 389788 31.81M 3236"$.41 $1511M 3400.13 38,,14884 so $36 M 81321.70 $2,988.87 $40441 $5.82429 $YA9L13 24 91.024.91 0tOMM $3AWA =4,987.15 $9,AWA4 $WTA1 ;1.187.17 12,174.34 43,903.21 46.73820 37.714.40 =10691$.70 32 $1550.33 $?.700.65 44.4M9 38A8?r8A $8,77315 $11.146.99 36 $1612.48 $3626.87 44.479.76 $?.?26.40 18.763.91 $1 '18 40 3167864 $9.34Zs 46AOM 4?A0A.14 $10.749M 813.644.68 5 5 5246.18 ;48227 $MY.= $1.435..71 $MAM75 $2.8'0.81 10 $447.32 $8!4.04 41,54472 $2,329.90 $3,250.37 =47300.83 15 5WAS $$,290.91 $2181.80 $3.224.80 $4.42499 $5.78'.06 20 $84956 51,699.17 $2:619.09 $019.24 $3599.01 =7.20420 2.5 $1.050.72 $2,101.49 33ASM $5.01388 $6,774.23 $9.747.34 30 $1.251.85 32.503.70 $4683.47 55,908.53 87A4886 $1004A8 35 81.452.98 $260887 =4.730.60 $A.AM16 $9.123.48 =11,891.00 40 $1,8'.14,12 $3,908.23 $bX?.$S $7x587.81 $10098.10 $13.108.73 4b $1.855.25 $3.710A9 $6.005.04 $8.59245 31IA72.72 i14,MAS 50 32656.38 $4.11275 $8,842.22 i9A$7.08 512727.34 $18.122.99 g 6 3284.17 $563.32 51.021A5 $1.507.21 $226581 $3.056.68 12 $529.27 $1046.53 5137255 $2.633.74 33.53Q10 $4.761.63 19 :762.38 $1.524.75 $2523.67 53,650.28 $4594,60 $6.466.00 24 $1.001-48 $2AM96 $3.27477 $4.726.81 $6,358.06 $8,17157 30 $1.240.59 $2.481.17 $4 025.89 $5.773-38 $7,723.57 $9.876.5 . 35 $1.479.69 $2,9M39 $4.777.00 36,81999 $9.0$9.07 811.581.52 42 $1.718.80 33137.00 $6,528.10 *T.WS.43 $10,462.56 $19,280.49 - 48 $1957.90 $3.915.81 $SZPJ22 38,91296 $11,817.04 914.891.40 54 $2.197.01 $4.394.02 57030.33 59.969.50 $13,181.54 $16.699.43 60 52,438.11 $4,87223 37.781.44 $11.006.03 $14,548.03 $18,401.42 TOT$=L P.003 MAR -10-1994 15:01 P.03 ORDINANCE NO. 1592 asasaaassasassssss AN UNCODIFIED URGENCY ORDINANCE OF TBE LODI CITY COUNCIL REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1563 IN ITS BNfiIRETY, AND AMENDING L0DI MMCIPAL CODE CiUWM 13.16, RZI A71M TO COMMERCIAL 10 to 50 CUBIC YARD ROLL -OFF BOXES sssassasss ssassssassssaassasaasasasss BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITr COUNCIL, as follow: SECTION i. Ordinance No. 1563 is hereby repealed in its entirety, and shall be of no further force or effect. SECTION 2. Bates. A. The rates to be charged for commercial 10 to 50 cubic yard roll -off box collection service shall be as follows: 1. For owners or tenants of business houses, the rates shall be as set forth in the Commercial 10 to 50 Cubic Yard Roll -Off Bax Rate Structure schedule attach, when such service is requested. B. All of the rate schedules set forth in this section shall be effective on all bills which are prepared on or after April 1, 1994. SECTION 3. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. SECTION 4. This is an urgency ordinat:ce under Government Code Section -1- - . ;wY«n:�.w'9fJrawd wLgfWq�f�"�MHhk,:�tfi�4 ft 36934, and is based on health, safety and welfare considerations arising from the need to collect appropriate fees for waste removal. S&CTION 5. This urgency ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinel", a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect immediately. ,ICTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lodi hereby finds and declares pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 that the commercial refuse collection rates established in ordinance 1563 are necessary and reasonable for the usual operating expenses of the Franchisee, including employee wages and benefits and for the purpose of purchasing facilities, equipment, and materials. Approved this 16th day of March 1994 JACK A. SIEGLOCK, Mayor Attest: JENNIFER M. PERRIN City Clerk ssssassssassssssssssassssssassassssasssssssass:s:sass:sssasessasssssssss _Z_ ........._...�......._ .........-..,��.........._� ... .. ....�... ..., ...�...w... �....w.......... ..........._... .... �r..�.. .. �......... .w.+wo�wr..:.... e.ISY�nC{INi^tY. ' state of California County of San Joaquin, ss. I, Jennifer M. Perrin, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1592 Mas adopted as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held March 16, 1994, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Noes: Council Members - Absent: Council Members - Abstain: Council Members - I further certify that Ordinance No. 1592 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. JRNNIFRR M. PRRRIN City Clerk Approved as to Form BOBBY MCNATP City Attorney ! -3. 0 0 CONTRACT BIOS FRZQMlCT DROP RATZS .rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.rrrrrr.rrrrrr 1. Drop-o:!/Pick-up $111.00 Charge Per BOX •2. Tons Disposed/Sm x Processing Chsrgo x$25.00 Processing Charge 3. Franchise Fee (4.8• of 1+2) TOTAL SILL (1+2+3) rrrr....... Oti-TDR DROP RAT= .................. 1. Drop-o!!/Pick-Up $181.30 Charge Per Box 2. Tons Disposed/Box x Processing Charge x$25.00 Processing Charge 3. Frauchise Fee (4.8% of 1+2) TOTAL BILL (1+2+3) .....rr.rrr -5- CONTRACT NJ= nXQmCY DROP Russ .................................. i. Drop-off/Pick-up 4111.32 Charge Poe Box 2. Tons Disposed/90M x Processing Charge x423.00 Processing Charge 3. Franchise Fee (4.8% of 1+2) TOTAL HILL (1+2+3) .r.rrrrrrr. OM -TDM DROP RATZ �rrrrr.rrrrrr.rrrr 1. Drop-off/Pick-pp 4182.14 Charge Per sox 2. Tons Disposed/Sox x Proces8ing Charge x423.00 Processing Charge 3. Franchise Fee 14.8% of 1+2) TOTLL HILL 11+2+3) •••••r••••• -6- _.._...._., ....-«..........ss....,.nv.. ..... � ......... .. ..... �......sr.«.s....r..xt�.w.v.hi+.nm*a..�w�+.n.1MR^xA.�!�I' ^,►t r�`;rxh'�;':4�i'S': perch 16, 199h lire Mayor and members o IMM City Coaacilt Tonight we hope to give you an alternate view from that heard on March 7, 1994 when all speakers were against the City "allowing" the garbage rate to increase. None of us Want an increase. We are sure that each of you have reviewed the contract agreement signed in September 1988 as well as the Refuse Rate Methodology in the Council minutes of December h, 1991. (Reference: CC -22(b)). The third sentence of the contract shown on Rage 7, oaragraoh 20 and quoted by Council Member Davenport at the March 7, 1994 City Council Special Meeting is correct but it is taken out of context. The oreceding and very first two sentences of paragraph 20 are most meaningful and CAN NOT be overlooked nor ignored. Those two sentences of page 7, paragraph 20, u end r the heading of "Breach by Contractor" read as follows: "In the event Contractor should default in the performance of any material provisions of this agreement, and the default is not cured within 30 days after receipt of written notice of default from City, then City may, at its option, hold a hearing at its next City Council meeting to detezmdne whether this Agreement should be terminated. In the event City decides to terminate this Agreement, City shall serve 10 days written notice of its intention to terminate upon Contractor." These two sentences are then followed by the very sentence which Council Member Davenport requested to have stated into the record, here quoted directly from the Contract: "In the event City exercises its right to terminate this Agreement, City may, at its option, either directly undertake performance of the services or arrange with other persons to oerform the services with or without a written agreement." To be blunt, we feel there is no choice but to allow the rate increase to the Lodi Sanitary City Disposal Coemany unless the City finds reason to question the performance of the Lodi Sanitary City i?isoosal Comoany. The issue here is: "WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THIS INCREASE?" eve have never questioned helping those with a real monetary need but with the current budget crisis in Lodi we should all share equally in the necessary rate increase and reserve the $10.00 trash carts for those who can substantiate their need. Our presentation before the City Council in 1991 suggested the aforesaid be the way to handle this contingency. We again request this substantia%tou of need. Fair is Fair and just because a senior does not generate vouch garbage (trash) in later life, does not mean they are less responsible for the filling of land fills in earlier years. Seniors -- consider your blessings -- help those kids pay a little less because you agree to pay a little more. In closing, we hope the Council will take note of the many absent faces to- night -- those who do not object to the necessary increase and stay home because they are satisfied with the quality of service and the way the City has handled the matter. They are as proud as we are of Lodi's record in meeting the State's mandate. Thank you. Janet C. Press Walter F. Pruss CITN COUNCIL THOMAS A. PETERSON od E JOHN R. (Ray) SNIDER, Maya CITY O O `' DAVID M. HINCHMAN Pro T HAI 2 1 WEST PINE STRFFT Maya9 EVELYN M. OLSON IAMES W. PINKERTON. Ir. FRED M.REID Dave Vaccarezza California Waste Removal 1333 E. Turner Road P. 0. Box 319 Lodi, CA 95240 Dear Dave: CITY 4 2 CALL BOX 3006 LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 (209)334.5634 TEtico"tR .12091 233-795 September 22, 1989 Systems BOB MCNATT City Attaeey 'SEP 2219 Clay Attorneys] ONies I need your assistance in answering a question. I received the attached copies of Vienna Convalescent bills for Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI) for infectious waste for the months of May and June. The bill they :•aceived from the City of Lodi, based upon your instructions, was more than ,__inuble the previous billing. _ Quite frankly, I don't know how to answer the inquiry without making both of us look pretty bad. Maybe you can give me an explanation as to why your rates are more than double the rates on the open market. Sincerely, n Jerry L. Glenn Assistant City Manager JLG:br Attachment cc: City Manager City Attorney ACMLT135 F�A I 4 W C 16 •-r = i N ••+ Y� 7 O O C C `- v •- a C -r v r•••� � J. w Y• rt O-r.+CG•� ++ u Z t. ✓ 7 •+ C% • Oa C'0v a C� C• a. 8i r V i GD • L1 jo L_ L i. ii :•: ✓ ✓ C ►. .� 0 3 r: :i ti �� G•G .3 C SI e.. v Z iJ 6r : C O 4.a'7 C Z �- ✓ :3 7 C ✓ L .7 i. ✓ Z J •-r L C 4 -v -- It : z z a aj .,E c COjf .. :► _ J .. v ✓ ✓ .. 4 - -• C 7. 0 r i • L -J v 7 O� �1 1 • •J Q :. '� u C .fir •., = r C c ., .. oc.. c� C. a . C L �. •J ] ••+ i : E :1 :� • O a c v 0 CY • t1 .a L•1 L r• O N .•1 • _ '� 95 Q• :+ -� it C L' -• jr. - r .3 ••( .. ® .: VJ i. LJ L LJ op G OF C• Jr. t: := L � t: 9 tM1 :• �� U r •n ,- ..t •r vi i v V •..r •� (•i i lir �- - a, Z 7 C iJ Aj G 4, r iJ 2 L � � •-t . •n - to � J «► L C Q C G -+ E G '• C r• 0 3 ] AJ «: r 3 4r J 7 ••• O Or > >• Yl � G a: 41 �. .Z ••� w $ t: .: L i C r � r w J i% and -A LO • LO a S 1. •-r C . � � - • C X d U O O :r 7 a 3 r• O.4 J : 3 r L e 3 j] •. -� 1 iY �J .: L r E ••� �: r C u iw V 1- C> ZTY COUNCIL JOHN R. IR&t*) SNIDER. Mayor D1.VID M. HINCHMAN MDVW Pro Tempore EVELYN M. OLSON JAMES W. ►INKERTON, Jr. FRED M. RE10 October 11, 1989 dfGITY OF LO�I CITY HALL. 221 WEST PINE STREET CALL BOX 300b LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241.1910 (209) 33+•5634 11ticoMtR 12"3334M David Vaccarezza President Sanitary City Disposal Co., Inc. 1333 E. Turner Road Post Office Box 319 Lodi, CA 95241=0319 Subject: Vienna Convalescent Infectious Waste ALKE JN. REMrICiM CIb Ctart 110111McNATt CNV Attorr W M OCT 13 089 City Attorney's riffio Dear Davi: r) i hope your letter of September 29, 1989 is not the explanation you want me to give to Ken Heffel regarding my September 22, 1989 letter to you requesting an explanation as to why your rates are more than double the rates on the open market. You previously provided the City with information regarding the infectious waste rates being charged by one or two other disposal companies. That does not give me the background information I would need in order to advise Mr. Heffel that it is appropriate to double his costs. If I advise him that this is what an ordinance passed by the City Council says, I am sure we car both predict his reaction. I I am confident he will push until he gets his answer, and I don't think we will look too good Sincerely yours, iJ P.Y L. GLENN �issistant City Manager cc: City Manager City Attorney GARBINFE/TXTA.01V v00 9 DOCNEfEpENCEE LOCATION PLEASE RETAIN THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS I. BROWNING -FERRIS INDUSTRIES 12131 263-6400 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS PAGE 1 261 NORCAL DISTRICT PLEASE PAY FROM THIS INVOICE NO OTHER BILLING WILL BE MADE BFI 260.477 1005 IENNA CONVALESCENT QO0 HAM LANE S• 0SI30/69 4042439 TICKET CHARGE 39.00 66t07/89 4042719 TICKET CHARGE 39.00 06/13/89 4043011 TICKET CHARGE 39.00 06/20/69 4043290 TICKET CHARGE: 39 LOCATION TOTAL .............. 156.00 BILLING AJ STNENTS. 0"30/69 FINANCE CHARGE_ 2.42 ADJUSTMENT TOTAL .............. 2.42 INVOICE TOTAL .............. lS8.42 1 PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER JUNE 30v 1969 WILL NOT BE REFLECTEC ON THIS INVOICE. PLEASE RETURN TOP 7F THIS INVOICE KITH PAYMENT. THANK YOU. PLEASE RETAIN THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS I. BROWNING -FERRIS INDUSTRIES 12131 263-6400 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS PAGE 1 261 NORCAL DISTRICT PLEASE PAY FROM THIS INVOICE NO OTHER BILLING WILL BE MADE BFI 260.477 • 90500-0094987 • �•- ,�►! DDC REFtf1E W5CN11•f►tw4 s6RVICE LOC TION 1001VIENNA CONVALESCENT 00 MAH LANE S. 105/01/89 k041340 TICKET CHARGE 05/08/a9 4041605 TICKET CHARGE 05/15/a9 041881 TICKET CHARGE /:2/ 05289 042146 1 TICKET CHARGE ILLING AUJSTHENTSI 05/31/89 LOCATION TOTAL 000000.0000000 FINANCE CHARGE ADJUSTMENT TOTAL •00000000000s• INVOICE TOTAL .060041100066600 I BROWNING—FERRIS INDUSTRIES BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS NORCAL DISTRICT PLEASE PAY FROM THIS INVOICE *4 NO OTHER BILLING WILL SE MADE ►AVO S bwtt 03I31Ia9 (213) 263-6400 PAGE I 39.00 39.00 39.00 39.00 156000 S. 3T 5.37 161.37 247 BFI 260-477 AV i N cctllFornogle reenovac epMm, Mr. Zbm Peterson - City Manager City of Lodi Call Box 3006 Lodi, California 95241 G August 16, 1989 ResInfectious Waste Rate Survey ::ear Mr. Petersons in following up on the meeting of July 13, 1989, concerning the the infectious waste rates presently being charged, I am enclosing the rates charged by a statewide company, American Environmental of Sacramento, and a private franchised refuse hauler, Vacaville Sanitary Service, as well as Sanitary City Disposal Company's charges. In every case, Sanitary City Disposal Company's rates are lower or comparable to the rate being charged for comparable service. I hope this information will be of use to you. If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience DV/rj enclosure Since David Vaccarezza President srcift(L :ru cKU dlrp od inzc. 13:3 c Turner Rood Post Of;ice 6oz 319 loch. iolifornic S-5441.031; o&? 369•8274 infrates 1I/ eJ-aalrr 'ladsrq r 031r Jarr12e92 aq2 a*rrd of Jaso3m aq3 alrobal Toa saop par liIrnirlIpor slaore2aoa sdlrgs aqt m o rroo resodsr0 im lle ms •ao marroa Jot ladseq a2SrA s10122a)or or o2rr Jarrr2ool Shcrgs aqi aaerd of Jaso2sea aq7 alrebaJ .i murS arlrm u pre lr2Qae9alrAal e121laef .. 1111802 i[SOdSIO 21ete2eos lad 11.919 02 0S '1S 'rri (5) aArj 02 •2b (E) a uq2 1112 111111!5 1001 'E 1111re2roa lad to -its 02 10'ES 'rrb (e) 2gira o2 '2b (1) oso 131AISS HUMS Iif1AYJU '1 21or12002 lad 01'0IS 02 ISIS -lei (1) 2gira 02 'Iri (1) ie0 if1RIR1011A1! 1Y2II21! 'I 1S0J ISIS S1211Y1103 SUM JIVIA J 1Ysoisla Jaderq lad 0S'tt$ .......... Jaderq lad 11'119 1112 Iff111fS 1001 It Jaderq lad 15'11$ Jadeeg lad 15'61S Jaderq lad 1S'Jf$ IJIAIIS 11f1II1s I".1IAlJYA '1 »rasa: 11139ee p 1A 12JAJas I14210R Jaderq lad 1/'SES .......... Jaderq jai 01'S1$ 831AJ0e IrgaeA JrreiaJ g2rA »rata: lrTSOA Jereial Jaderq jai 00'51$ .......... Jaderq lad 00'Sf$ 1111I81011A1I 1121128! m Will Ti TT17 801112 1 731 !T 801110 IE rII111802 Ty�i 21911 S 0 J! 11 it�c '!t 2sefef r Nc"My ". HIRATA . doe r.' s COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 9 O. sox Moo — solo C NA29lTON Ave"W[ STOCKTON. CAII/OMNIA 90201 1206/ $44.2261 May 2, 1986 David Vaccarezza General Manager California Waste Removal Systems, Inc. P. 0. Box 319 Lodi, CA 95241-0319 Dear Mr. Vaccarezza: �cuacws • oKueem:" M� w�aseM MANYK iO�Ri Nhrt. Meatal I have received a copy of your February 14, 1986, letter to your commercial customers in which you state that the establishment of a gate fee at the Harney Lane Landfill will increase rates paid by your customers as much as 100% or more. As we have informed you in previous correspondence relating to spe- cific instances, and as I have personally discussed with you, the transition from a franchise fee to a gate fee would not justify a- .1001 increase in your rates. If you wish to increase your rates by any amount that is your perogative, however you should not blame the increase totally on the establishment of gate fees. You are hereby requested to refrain from any such statements in the future. Very truly yours, EUGENE B. DELUCCHI Deputy Director/Operations EBD:nj N.0.19.4 c: Henry M. Hirata, Director . 1Tom Horton, Solid Waste Manager . r OI,pYii�i �c. '.. .-li O s RENRr M MIRATA 0004100 COUNTY OF SAN JOAOUIN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS F O •OA 1810 - /010 [ MAZCLTON AVENY[ STOCKTOM CALI/ORNI• OS209 1209/ 944 2201 April 29, 1986 David Vaccarezza General Manager SanCo Disposal -Service P.O. Box 319 Lodi, California 95241-0319 tuorkt e.00LUCtN1 W$%D►* Lather MMUEL IOPE2 cLrve• 61440 OA Subject: RESIDENTIAL REFUSE COLLECTION RATES IN REFUSE SERVICE AREA B Dear Mr. Vaccarezza: On April 2.8, 1986, Mr. Lynn Beasely, P.O. Box G, Victor, CA 95253, (209) 334-0955, contacted our office and questioned whether SanCo can charge $4.50 -for collecting an additional can on a one time onl, basis. Mr. Beasely is currently a one can residential customer. The rate established by the Board of Supervisors for each additional can i'n Refuse Service Area B, which is served by SanCo, is $3.25 per month. Since residential rates, for the unincorporated area of - the County, are established by the Board of Supervisors, your firm may not charge rates higher than those established by the Board. Accordingly, please contact Mr. Beasely to arrange for collection of his additional can at the $3.25 rate. Additionally, please review your residential rates for customers in the unincorporated area of the County to ensure that your rates are not higher than those which were established by the Board of Supervisors. Very truly yours, Tom Horton Solid Waste manager TH:JP: rc c: Henry M. iiirata, Director of Public Works Lynn IIt:ssely MEMORANDUM ss:ssssssa To: Thomas A. Peterson, City Manager From: Bob McNatt, City Attorney Date: October 18, 1990 Subject: SOLID WASTE ssssssss:ss:ssss::asssssssssssasasssass:ssssssasssssasssssssssssssssssss:ss As you know, in the past few weeks, California Waste Removal Systems has notified the City of several perceived violations of its solid waste franchise. I feel sure we are going to have to deal further with some of these issues, so this memo will keep you apprised of what I have done so far, and offer some legal observations. As to the complaints about Waste Management of Stockton placing a bin at the insulation contracting firm on Black Diamond Way, I think that is resolved. I prepared for Bob Holm's signature a tetter dated October 9, 1990 to Harold Reno of Waste Management, and I followed that up with a phone call on October 17, 1990. Mr. Reno understands the situation (I believe), i.e., that a contracting firm is probably a commercial user. Mr. Reno has agreed to remove the bin. He was also asked about information from California Waste that he has large bins at residences on Elm Street, Hutchins Street, Carlo Way, and Fairmont Avenue. He indicated he did not have specifics on these bins. -I suggested that if they were there to serve the contractors engaged in remodeling of homes, they are probably commercial accounts and thus subject to California Waste Removal's franchise. He indicated he would get back to me after looking into the situation. On a related note, I have a copy of a letter from Dave Vaccarezza dated October 12, 1990 in which he seems to say that he has an exc3usive right to run a recycling center and to collect all recyclables in the City. I think that is clearly wrong, although the answer i% not completely apparEnt in reading the franchise agreement and Municipal Cc4e. Paragraph 3 of the franchise agreement states in pertinent part: "Contractor shall have the full and exclusive right to all recyclable or salvageable material collected in connection with the refuse, " (emphasis added). In Municipal -code Section 13.16.010 1, "Refuse" is defined as any and all discarded items and substances of every Tind When these provisions are read together, the conclusion which seems most logical to me is that until an item is discarded, it is not refuse. That would mean that the franchisee has a right to only those recyclable materials which are discarded as part of the refuse collection. REFUSE7/TXTA.0IY 2. Scope of Agreement Contractor shall furnish all materials and equipment required for the orderly collection of refuse on a regularly scheduled basis to all residential and commercial customers, within the City limits, and to transport the refuse to a disposal site provided or designated by City. Contractor's services shall be subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Lodi Municipal Code, and all other county, state and federal laws pertaining to the collection and transportation of refuse to which Contractor is subject. Contractor shall perform the services provided for in this Agreement only for the compensation provided in this Agreement, and not otherwise. 3. Exclusive Nature of Agreement Contractor shall have within the City limits, subject to the limitations contained in this Agreement, the exclusive right and duty to collect and transport to a site designated by the City all refuse except industrial refuse. ( Contractor shall have the full and exclusive right to all recyclable or salvageable material collected in connection with the refuse, and shall have the exclusive right to any funds realized from the sale of recycled or salvaged materials. The exclusive rights granted to Contractor By this Agreement shall not interfere with or in any way restrict City's right to collect, transport and dispose of septic tank, sand trap and grease trap contents. Mar v► Marcb lo, 1994 We would Uke to have curbside service at least once a year. This service would be to pick up things not normally picked up our weekly pick up e.g.) old furniture etc. rCrC.t.4 ,t��-v-' G-1 J-Z< 9L - f v r ,� �� ..i'j,�/� � •moi i�.L _-� iwt_:o p000' A 'i&-? en ro& O P.- .r CAMBRIDGE PLACE OWNERS' ASSOCIATION P.O. 80X 10378 STOCKTON. CA 93267 (209) 956-5660 (209) 339-9813 March 16,1994 city Council City of Lodi California 221 West Pine Street Lodi, California 95241-1910 Re: Proposed Trash Rate Increase Dear Council Members: I am writing you this letter to inform you that the City Ordinances No. 1590 and 1591 on tonight's City Council Meeting agenda are not in order at this time and a decision should not be rendered. This is because, as you are well aware, at the last council meeting Stan Harper gave our City Attorney, Bob McNatt, a copy of the contra -t between the City of Lodi and Lodi Sanitary City Disposal Co., Inc. Mr. McNatt returned the copy to Mr. Harper and informed him that the contract was a complete copy. With this in mind and after reviewing the complete contract, I feel that I need to inform you that there has been no modification to amend the "Modification to Agreement" that wasdated September 18,1991, (ORD1522rI'XTA.02J). In this modification the City Council changed the reviewing date for annual rate adjustments from June to September and the effective date for these rate adjustments were changed from July 1 to October 1. With these City Ordinances in place there should be no decision at tonight's meeting other than tabling the decision until September 1994, or the ordinances need to be amended. I have attached a copy of the "Modification to Agreement" for your information. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 339-9813 or in Stockton at 956-5660. Sincerel % i Tom M urp , CCAM As agent for Cambridge Place Owners' Association cc: Board of Directors Correspondence ...,.._.... .�. _.�._._._._..___---___. _.....-._.....-... ... ...... _._.<. ....,.,..._ .. _...T.,.z....www...es.�u.�w�.,�.�nn-.eN•m.,,.., �.r .. �tieeove».,H,i9�',?a�«naw.«�,ra�.:.�:F,.�t:. 0 .7 EASTSIDE IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE;, t ! ,.; �; Cry V dw..,; 5,p4ta9 Com., �4 J0 P.O. Bao( 2454 U* Ca: MO (M) 36>s-tlM March 11, 1994 TO: Lodi City Council and Staff, Jerry Glenn, Kirk Evans FROM: Virginia Snyder RE: Annual curbside pick up of household discards(garbage rate increase Okay, I know. You're tired of hearing about this, but it's too important to let an opportunity for a valuable city service slip away. As I read it, the mood of Lodi citizens will not stand for future garbage rate increases for some time. If we don't include curbside pickup in this year's package, it may be years before we can bring it up again. In the time allowed, we've polled as many of the 327 residents on our telephone list as possible. Also, approximately eighty five citizens attended our meeting last night, and there is a real feeling of anger and betrayal over the garbage increase. EIC has not taken a position on the increase, nor do we intend to. We have taken a position on a yearly curbside pickup, though. When 1 came before you on February 2, 1994 to make this proposal, the mayor directed the matter to be discussed at a shirt -sleeve session. I've telephoned the City Clerk several times to find out the date for the shirt -sleeve, but it has not been scheduled, so we won't have a chance to discuss this with you before your vote. This council has demonstrated a willingness to create a vision for Lodi that is impressive, and we want to help you further that vision. With the garbage increase and proposed business license increase, the mood of voters is worrisome. With the garbage increase, you are in a position to at least give voters a bonus that might assuage some of the resistance that were seeing. When residents see the very real benefit they receive from a curbside pickup, some of the frustration might be abated. As you know, the dumpster collection last October was tremendously popular with citizens -- people from all over the city brought their refuse to the sites, and we encouraged that. Maybe you can create a win/win situation all around by at least giving rate -payers a little more for their money. Cal -Waste is asking for a $1.25 per month increase. Dave Vaccerezza says twenty-five cents per month will cover the cost of an annual c»rbside pickup. Isn't there some room for negotiation to include a curbside pickup in the package? Maybe Cal -Waste would include a curbside pickup for the same price, or maybe you could split the difference with them. With such a small monthly amount, there must be some way to include a curbside pickup in this rate increase. ... .. . ... ... ... �....✓._.+H.�w.licc:••.ar•-,rwNRYvm�K�ut.^..tl^'1: �1-�.. March 13, 1994 Lodi City Council 221 W. Pine :'. ' I ` �: • r • i Lodi. CA 95240 Dear Sirs: I hope to speak at the upcoming March 16 council meeting. However, I have a church commitment every Wednesday evening. Therefore, I am expressing my opinions In written form in the event I don't make the Wednesday meeting in time. I will always have monthly bills. I want to keep those bills as low as possible. I also realize that there will be periodic increases in my bills. Those increases are natural and unavoidable. Such is the case with the proposed rate increase for waste removal. As I understand it, two consultants were hired to figure out what the rate structure method would be. One consultant was hired by the city and one hired by CA Waste. The consultants did their homework, got together, and brought a proposal to the city which approved the projected program. The program included the distinct possibility of the proposed rate increase now wider discussion. I, personally, have expected the increase, I just didn't know how much it would be or just when it would happen. Some people think CA Waste makes a lot of money from selling recylcables. As I talk to people in other communities, they say the recyclable market is not that great. A few recyclables pay off, others don't. Thankfully, CA Waste takes many different recyclable items to slow the flooding of the landfills, not just those recyclables that are profitable. Additionally, more people are recycling. than was anticipated under the proposed progra.-si. That added expense should be dealt with by the community, not CA Waste. Finally, I wish to comment on the idea that California Waste should make an annual pickup of refrigerators, sofas, etc. I think that's totally unreasonable. I was impressed in the past when Ca Waste allowed days where public loads could be brought into the site at a drastically reduced rate. I also appreciated those days when extra bagged trash has been picked up throughout the community for free. But to expect them to pick up everything short of abandoned cars? I'm sure the council is aware that CA Waste funnels a percentage of the recycling proceeds back into Lodi schools to be used in the classroom. So I won't belabor that point. I'm also confident that the city has the means to audit and monitor the profit margin of the company to assure that it's reasonable. So 1 won't question that aspect. What I will do is say again that although I wish my monthly bills never increased, know they occasionally will. As to the waste removal rate increase, I am confident that it Is necessary and would ask that you, as a council, also accept it as such. Sincerely, Jay ell MARCH 15.1994 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF LODI P.O. BOX 3006 LODI, CA. 95211-11110 DEAR COUNCILHEMBERS, INCREASING COSTS IN' AN" AREA OF OUR LIKES IS NOT POPULAR. BUT AT TIMES IT IS NECESSARY. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LONG TERM I14VESTMENT OF THE COST. THAT LONG TERM INVESTMENT IS OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. RECYCLING IS AND HAS TO BECOME A WAY OF LIFE. A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER IS HARD AT FIRST. BUT ONCE CHANGE BECOMES . NORMAL PART OF EVERYDAY LIFE IT BEGINS TO FEEL RIGHT. ALL OF I_;S HAVE TO 13ARTICIPATE IN CHANGING OUR ATTITUDES TOWARD Ft::C YCLING. WE HAVE GROWN UP .IN A TIME WHERE Yeti WOULD DUMPED FVEPYTP't%X NO MATTER WHAT THE PRODUCT WAS. WE HAVE. PAID A DEAR PRICE. FOR THIS. WE HAVE TOXIC LANA BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO COST US MILLIONS To 1:P. LESS LAND 'TO USE FOR DUMP SITES. THESE ARE .JUST SOME OF THE I-Rt►BLEMS WE ARE LEAVING OUR FI:Tt:RE t3 NF.RATIONS T;) CLEAN UP. THE WILL HAVE ENOUGH PROBLEMS TO DEAL WITH BESIDES THE OVER ABUNDANCE OF TRASH TO TAKE: CARE OF. [F I AND 0111E.HS CAN HELP THE FUTURE GoENERATIONS IN ONF. SMALL ARI*A OF THEIR LIVES LIN' RECYCLING AN'D ►\VESTING IN RECYCLING 'rHEN A RATE INC}.EASE. 1S NOT THAT HARD, TO LIVE t+ITH. ' PLEASE: CONSIDER WHAT CAL WASTE HAS DONE FOR THIS COMMUNITY. THEY ]NVF•:S•T RACK I N•r0 TH L % COMMUNITY . 'TIFEY PROVIDE JOBS FOR PEOPLE IN LODI. THEN' BUY PRODUCTS IN LODI FOR THEIR BUSINESS. CAL WASTE DONATES MONEY TO LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS AND SCHOOLS. CAL WASTE HAS AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM TO REACH CHILDREN IN THE CLASSROOMS TO TEACH THEM Aito ;•r it1•CY,'LA NU. CAL WAS i is HAS REDUCED LANDFILL i;ti AGE THRU REC;YLING. WHICH HAS SAVED LODI FROM PAYING FINES FOR NOT RECYCLING. RIGHT NOW 'rHAT IS WHAT ALL OF 12S HAVE TO DO. IS TO INVEST IN LODI. PART OF 'rHAT TNVF.STMENT ISA RATE: INCREASE NOW. BUT ALWAYS LOOS; AT THE LONG TERM TO SEE wIIAT rII.%'r INVI,srMFNT WILL 3ENEFIT. OUR CHILDREN' AND GR,\NDC•H I Li)RFN . OUR COMMUN I'i'1 . S t IN,ICE RLy' �7 • ••II+ 1• a'•. '•• 11"� 1/ ``'1} •'t• I';' �'�. • '�} 1 • - M Aa � N IIt�'/ • DATE: 161, 1994 S(BJ: REFUSE RAPE IlNMMSE im Sam & Kim Hernandez 427 E. Vine St. Lodi CA 95240 March 15, 1994 City Council Members; Regarding California Waste removal systems rate increase. It is our understanding that this is a State mandate that cities comply or face large fines. The plan that was recommended by the Citizens Task Force and approved by our City Council was implemented by California Waste. Although i+ is never anyone's desire to pay more, this inevitably is what happens when State mandates require major restructuring of a current system. We personally feel that this increase is justified and should be granted to California Waste. We have lived in Lodi most of our lives and have the utmost respect for Dave Vaccarezza and Tom Sanchez as honest businessmen who care about our community. Sincerely; Sam Hernandez Kim Hernandez C7 March 15, 1994 City Council City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA. 95241-1910 v .J - . j� j`•''� rf Dear Council Members: I an an Eastside Lodi resident and I support the increasing garbage rate. I, like so many others like costs to be kept down, whenever possible. Consider the service California haste brings to our. -community; reliable service, recycling and jobs. The city agreed to help implement and finance the waste reduction plan, so now let's follow through. Sincerely, Ondt-�uc�,�wL Andrea Madrid .w...n.•�.a..• - .• .rw.M•�.Krn,• -.-r •�. aK't91�.'L .... .. ..'3ii+`.fYY�11rYS.eMw.wwwwe:.....v.+�•..-•_-. •_..-. _. LJ March 16. 1994 Mayor lack S•tegiock Councilman Randy Snider Councilman Phil Peiinno Councilman Ray Davenport Coundlman Steve Mann Lodi City Council Call Bohr 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Dear Mayor Sieglock and Councilmemberx 7-1 LJ I am writing to you in regards to the proposed rate increase in our monthly garbage bill. The fads as I understand them are as follows: 1. The City of Lodi adopted the three -cart waste colkaiop and recycling program. This program included the construction of the material recovery facility as well as other costs (carts, eta). The program was adopted to comply with the State of California mandate. 2 The City of Lodi recently hired an independent accounting firm to conduct an audit of California Waste, the results of which indicated that the financial statements were fairly presented. Fee increases of any type are naturally unpopular in today's environment. The proposal to raise the business license tax is a direct example. We personally do not have any significant objection to an increase in the business license tax in general. However, we feel the City of Lodi needs to do their homework in developing a new rate structure and work with those impacted. Most importantly, however, is to live up to whatever is adopted. Don't waste everybody's time and money and then change the program. My point is that we feel the City of Lodi is waffling on this garbage rate issue. You've done your job. You've implemented a program to comply with the State of California mandate. You've audited the financial records. What more can we ask of California Waste or the Council with respect to this matter. We say honor your agreement with California Waste, approve the increase, and start tackling other issues facing the City of Lodi. Sincerely, Bruce and Joy S 3026 Rosewood Drive Lodi, CA 95242 0 DAVID P. WARNER AMMY d I" 215 West OA Street Lodi. C&NW#" 95240 (209) 368-5175 March 15, 1994 Jack A. Sieglock, Mayor City of Lodi Lodi, CA Dear Mr. Sieglock: I am writing regarding the request for an increase in garbage rates to be considered by the Lodi City Council on March 16, 1994. Due to prior commitments, I do not anticipate being personally present at that meeting. I believe I am in agreement with most citizens when I say I don't want an increase of any rates for any reason. While that is a rather simple position which is tied to my own financial interest, it ignores both the realities of life and the quality of life and services which I expect to receive from this city. I think we are fortunate to live in Lodi. It is a clean, safe and efficient city. That can be proven at any time by looking to neighboring cities or other cities in this state. Our refuse collection and recycling program may be only one part of, but a very important part of, that clean city. As a citizen, I want the garbage collection to be done cleanly, efficiently, and professionally. The California Waste equipment and personnel fit that description. If the service was cheaper, would the trucks look as clean? Would the employees look as professional? What would the surrounding streets look like after they had picked up the trash or recyclables? I know what it would look like and that's why I live in the city of Lodi. The recycling program is a good one and the envy of this entire state. We cannot continue to take the cheap way out and leave an environment for our children and grandchildren full of our discarded materials. The right thing to do is to have such a program and pay the price that comes with it, as difficult as that pill may be to swallow. As a lifetime Lodi citizen, I urge you to make the tough decision and keep Lodi the city that it is, a clean, safe and efficient community. We have started an excellent refuse and recycling program. I urge you to continue to take the steps necessary to keep that program in place and operating efficiently. If you have any questions regarding my thoughts or opinions, please feel free to contact me at either 334-0547 or 368-5175. Your time and effort directed towards the welfare of this city is appreciated. Very truly yours, ��t P. Wa ,- ,_ David P. Warner DPW:ma r; CLUTCH do BRAKE XCHANGE, INC. 1900 E. Fremont Street Stockton, Ca. 95205 Lodi City Council: 0 T / March 16, 1994 Being a vendor of California Waste and a business operating in San Joaquin County, we know how important It is in these economic times to be able to depend on any projected revenue In- creases that would facilitate expansion decisions, employment opportunities, and ongoing operations. We, like California Waste, do forecasting based upon contracts and sales. We need to be able to de- pend on our contracts being honored in order to remain a viable operation, especially it large capital Investments are made based on these ongoing agreements. Very Truly Yours, Clutch & Brake Xchange ?James T. Hitchcock esident W W March 15, 1994 City council City of Lodi P.o. Box 3006 Lodi, Ca. 95241-1910 Dear Council Members: There have recently been many negative comments about an increase in garbage rates in Lodi, I would like to make a couple of positive comments. First of all, I would like to comment California Waste for providing the city with a recycling program. Not only does this program help in conserving the earth, but it also saves the city from paying 10,000.00 per day in fines. This program has brought down the amount of garbage that go into the landfills and have put recyclable materials into good use which has also provided the city with more jobs. I know that everyone is going through hard times, and need all of the money they can spare, a small increase is nothing compared to the hundreds of dollars that we will be paying to clean up our city after our landfills are overfilled. Second, we should support California Waste because it has helped the city meet the guidelines set by the State Recycling Laws, in other words it is a requirement to have some kind of recycling program. California Waste has been a well respected company in Lodi that has help out the community a lot, and now it's the communities turn to give something back. When you make your decision, I hope that you consider the positive side to the increase, and also consider the benefits it will leave for future generations, like a beautiful clean city for all to enjoy. Sincerely, }tiff Cynthia Becerra qW SELDOM BRUSA INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. 1100 WEST TOKAY STREET. SUITE 8 • LODI. CALIFORNIA 93210 LODI (209) 334-3235 STOCKTON (209) 931.6611 March 15, 1994 Mayor Jack Sieglock and Members of the City Council 221 W. Pine Lodi, CA. 95240 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council: I am writing you relating to the Council meeting of March 16, 1994 and the pending rate increase for waste removal. I have read the local newspaper concerning the adverse comments, from the community, on the increase. I would like to inform you that I am a part of the silent majority that never appears before you to complain about the garbage company. I feel their service is outstanding and the rates very affordable in relation to other fixed costs that are a part of our household budgets. The Council has conducted studies on the garbage collection. The Council has audited the Company's business, spending $25,000 of the tax payers money, to see if they have been operating within their contract on waste reduction and are honest and forthright. As a taxpaying citizen, homeowner, and user of the service, I would suggest that the Council has enough information to vote in favor of the rate increase. S cerely, igel C. rusa SB/ds SPECIALISTS IN DESIGN, SALES AND SERVICE OF: PersonaILife Insurance — Business Insurance — Croup lasurance — Estate And Tar Analysis — Pension And Profit Sharing Nwof �QINTIN0 &tiRA�NICS City. Council, City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 ' J ' Lodi, California 95241-1910 Dear Council Members: REE:[=I':'�l ^t; •t: t1 Ifs Q`� N?. rI� March 16. 1994 This letter is to let the council know how we as a small lodi business feels regarding the waste cart system rate increase. First of all we know that no body likes to hear about price increases, my self included, but sometimes they are necessary to better our self and our surroundings. If you look at the whole picture this increase is one that will benefit the city as well as the business in Lodi, California Waste is not one of those companies that take moneys from the local area and spend it out of town. they use local vendors for most of there needs keeping revenues local, they also spend time and resources for our local schools, which can do nothing but benefit Lodi in the future and not to mention the recycling benefits we see that will help our ecology. Also the jobs provided to Lodi residents help the local economy and we as a small Lodi business relay on these things to keep our business running and so that we can provide services to the local community just like California Waste. I feel that the rate increase that the City of Lodi and California Waste have been working on for quite Some time is a fair increase and will not harm the residents of Lodi or the City but will only help in the long run. Please keep these thing in mind when making your decision regarding this issue. Thank You Ron Haworth owner 14 Souili SCliool STREET Lodi CAMORNiA 9 5240 PhoNE 209 / 3 3 3 / 2 5 5 9 FAx 209 / 3 3 3 / 7014 C Ted Witt 101 Rivergate Place Lodi, Calif. 95240 City Council City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, Calif. 95241-1910 E �r.-t:�-•:1.. Dear councilmembers: Regarding the proposed increase in garbage rates in Lodi. I have had the oppurtunity to observe Cal -waste while in action. This company is among one of the finest operations I have ever seen. Cal -waste not only does it's job removing waste from our city, it does much more by looking toward the needs of the future. I have done business with other garbage companies and none are as efficient. The total operation is the best I have seen. If a small increase in rate is necassary to have a company such as Ckl-waste caring for our city, then so be it. Sincerely, �Od4vv� Ted Witt - -_.. _.... _....._._._. �.._.�....., ... _......_ .__....._..........» •..- ....... �.. ,...1......�.m,....awv�.wa�«na:*o�.err+�swrw �•.wVc+!»nx��u.�x�n6�Yr,'Y�ta�+�b'd'!`>: El DAVID P. WARNER Aun wy at lar 213 West Oak Street Lodi. California 95240 (209)368-3173 March 15, 1994 Jack A. Sieglock, Mayor City of Lodi Lodi, CA Dear Mr. Sieglock: El I am writing regarding the request for an increase in garbage rates to be considered by the Lodi City Council on March 16, 1994. Due to prior commitments, I do not anticipate being personally present at that meeting. I believe I am in agreement with most citizens when I say I don't want an increase of any rates for any reason. While that is a rather simple position which is tied to my own financial interest, it ignores both the realities of life and the quality of life and services which I expect to receive from this city. I think we are fortunate to live in Lodi. It is a clean, safe and efficient city. That can be proven at any time by looking to neighboring cities or other cities in this state. Our refuse collection and recycling program may be only one part of, but a very important part of, that clean city. As a citizen, I want the garbage collection to be done cleanly, efficiently, and professionally. The California Waste equipment and personnel fit that description. If the service was cheaper, would the trucks look as clean? Would the employees look as professional? What would the surrounding streets look like after they had picked up the trash or recyclables? I know what it would look like and that's why I live in the city of Lodi. The recycling program is a good one and the envy of this entire state. We cannot continue to take the cheap way out and leave an environment for our children and grandchildren full of our discarded materials. The right thing to do is to have such a program and pay the price that comes with it, as difficult as that pill may be to swallow. As a lifetime Lodi citizen, I urge you to make the tough decision and keep Lodi the city that it is, a clean, safe and efficient community. We have started an excellent refuse and recycling program. I urge you to continue to take the steps _...�._.__.r....._..-.._--•,..�.........-M._...,................,... ..... ... .. ,... ..-,... ......,. .. ... ..,.. �.rnr,.yr vn-�.. r.-.,....,., .. -. :.ai+R4.au ec�.y[ ,:,rSA'iV7M!`�?WL'�L +,�''!if,:71:u.t .. fe'.iJ:.�,• Fr necessary to keep that program in place and operating efficiently. If you have any questions regarding my thoughts or opinions, please feel free to contact me at either 334-0547 or 368-5175. Your time and effort directed towards the welfare of this city is appreciated. Very truly yours, ��A P. waw, David P. Warner DPW:ma �.�.-r—+..��.....v.—..M._�__.. ....ti_.._...�......-._�........�.................�r.+awr�+snw.�vM+wn:•.w.i.✓wN]'.NY+wrw.Vi'V�JMrYS'S1r.MYMT+IS{'AG .. March 14, 1994 Honorable Mayor and City Council City Hall Lodi, California When the State of California passed the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, that law required every city in the state 'to divert 25 per cent of it'a solid waste from landfill disposal by the year 1995. This diversion requirement increases to 50 per cent by the year 2000. The City of Lodi took a pro -active approach to meeting these requirements by appointing a citizen's Solid Waste Management Task Force which first met in January of 1991. They met many hours trying to decide which alternative would be the most efficient way to meet these state mandates. The task force recommended the present system which included asking California Waste Removal Systems to help the city meet the mandates of the state by integrating the present system. The facility, which California Waste Removal Systems built to satisfy the mandate, is a state of the art operation designed to provide efficient service to the citizens of Lodi while maximizing protection of our environment. This construction involved a large financial commitment by the company. I believe the system is working well and it appears that California Waste Removal is doing everything it can to keep costs in line. The proposed rate is still less than that of comparable surrounding communities, many of whom do not receive the same quality of service enjoyed by the citizens of Lodi. =-Z�Dennis Deg Chairman, City of Lodi Solid Waste Task Force .... . _ .._. _ . -,._ , ,x ae a..,., .�!. meM.iCaE.�FL'�J,(+ls•.! �wy>�"�v :!;wpm'v�a •, ,` ♦ `. i • • i.... March 13, 1994 City Council City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA. 95241-1910 Dear Council Mashers: I as an Eastside Lodi resident and I support the increasing garbage rate. I, like so luny others like costs to be kept down. whenever possible. Consider the service California haste brings to our. -community; reliable service, recycling and jobs. The city agreed to help Implement and finance the waste reduction plan, so now let's follow through. Sincerely. Andrea Madrid n Match 16. 1994 Mayor Jack Siealock Couoabrnn Randy Snider Councilman Phil Peninno Councilman Ray Davenport Coune3lmsa Steve Mann . Lodi City Council Cal Bou 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Darr Mayor Sieglock and Councilmanbers: t1FC.I I`? E fi Is �. 1 am writing to you in regards to the propaod rate increase in our monthly garbage bHL The facts as 1 understand than are as follows: 1. The City of Lodi adopted the three cart waste Collection and recycling program. This program included the Construction of the material recovery facility as well as other coats (cath, de.). The program was adopted to comply with the State of California mandate. 2 The City of Lodi recently hired an independcot accounting firm to Conduct an audit of California Waste. the results of which indicated that the financial statements were fairly presented. Fee increases of any type are naturally unpopular in today's environment. The proposal to raise the business Sown W is a direct example. We personally do not have any significant objection to an increase in the business license tax in general. However, we feel the City of Lodi needs to do their homework in developing a new rate structure and work with those impacted. Most importantly. however. is to live up to whatever is adopted. Don't waste everyl,,y's time and money and then change the program. My point is that we feel the City of Lodi is walling on this garbage rate issue. You've done your job. You've implemented a program to Comply with the State of California mandate. You've audited the financial records. What more can we ask of California Waste or the Council with respect to this matter. We say honor your agreement with California Waste, approve the increase, and start tackling other issues facing the City of Lodi. Sincerely, 4Js4-,kX at *AAJ Bruce and Joy Sasa 3026 Rosewood Drive Lodi, CA 95242 REDWOOD OIL COMPANY NOR CAL FILTER DIVISION 2701 DEL MONTE ST. WEST SACRAMENTOo, CA 95691 March 14, 1994 Lodi City Council 221 W. Pine Lodi, CA 95240 RE: California Waste Removal Systems Dear Council Members: Nor Cal Filter Company has been a supplier to California Waste Removal Systems for the past twelve years and has enjoyed the opportunity to provide goods and services in the Lodi area. Our company has always supported the concept of local business as we have multiple locations serving various local markets in the Northern California Area. It has been brought to our attention that California Waste Removal will be appearing before the Council on Wednesday, March 17, 1994, to submit a rate increase request based upon a rate making process that was agreed to in October of 1992. We understand that California Waste Removal has made a four -million dollar investment into the community based upon that rate making process. To deviate from that agreement could have disastrous effects to the entire California Waste Removal Systems program. We realize that no one is in favor of rate increases. However, may we join with others in expressing our support of the concept of maintaining local business and thus keeping the dollars and employment in the hands of a company which has the interest of the community as well as its own interest in mind. Therefore, we respectfully recommend to the Council that you support California Waste Removal in their rate increase proposal based upon the October 1992 rate making process agreement. S y, Paul Caspar Manager Nor Cal Filter Co. CORPORATE OFFICE: 455 YOLANDA AVENUE . P.O. BOX 426 + SANTA ROSA. CA 95402 . (707) 546-0766 0 March 14, 1994 Heyor Jack lock Lodi, City HsU 221 West Pine Street Lodi, G 95240 R8s California fasts .Removal - Rats review `''j rrA,� ►S IT 11 I am writing yon in support of the proposed rate adjust�w ot- foss the City of Lodi refuse disposal rates. It is ay I widing that at the tams the council made the decision to go to the new tiaras cart system that a rating plan was put into place to assist California Waste removal Systems in any ruture increass in costs caused by their investment in plant Mas carts, or vehicles associated with the establishment and servicing plant, f this Pte• In being associated with the Vaccarezza's both professionally and Pereorally. I know that they have spent millions of dollars in investrments hat twere done for only ane season. that .was to support the State mandated solid waste mnn�agement pa�o�am so Lodi would be in compliance with Stats regulatI-ons that start in 1995. mvicusly, if such ap had not been established. the Ci of Lodi would have had a difficult impossible task Of coming into the and avoiding the substantial State penalties. California Waste has always p�+tw time quali refuse service to the City of Lodi for over 55 the p this service at a fair price. I'm sure experience and firm zwiews carmtir ue to shorn their commitment to the Lodi connnifty. At your Wednesday Council meeting, I urge you to reinforce the INhip" that was established in October, 1992 when this parcgram was f zed, and affirm the rats adjustment that has became necessary due to increased costs anti increased usage of the three cart system. Your support of California Waste removal Systems in this endeavor on Wednesday night will be greatly appreciated, and show your contirnued commitment to keep Lodi's refuse service a quality states -of -tire -art system. Sincerely, A - i.G Vr Vice President cc: Mr. John Frmt, Administrative Manager California Waste Removal Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 241001 Lodi, CA 95241-9501 7 1—; ,�,,�;� tin»� t.11 �!1!rA I .fit • :�•:� .. ... 77777-7—--.----------- '+'�•'�YLF.iv:Fl�•'.�f��+'�"u�YPie.'FNS.:f�'��J",�4'1?��tfy'�� `;Y,:i!} �. im Thorpe Oil, InP. 361 N.: Rosd • P.O. Box 367 • Lodi. CA 96241: ""• 120013886176 0 12001462.4681 March 14, 1994 Councilman Jack Seiglock 221 W. Pine St. Lodi, CA 95240 Dear Jack: I want to take this opportunity to tell you that we at Jim Thorpe Oil, Inc. are solidly behind California Waste Removal Systems recycling programs. Having known David and Annette as long as I have, I believe that they are genuinely concerned with supplying the best service possible to our community. I urderstand the huge response to recycling has caused a need for more equipment. The glut of recyclables on the market does not make a lucrative market. I am also painfully aware that equipment repair and replacement costs continue to rise. Since California Waste rate making process was set in October 1992, I feel that to ask that it be continued is not out of line. I am sure that Cal. Waste has committed very substantial funds based upon the projected rising costs and rate increases founded on continuation of the process as agreed. To alter this planned rate setting process is not fair. We urge you and your co -councilmen not to deviate from the agreed upon rate setting system. Sincerly, JIM T HI -'t u1L, 1N1: Richaro Thorpe Presiaent ..._.. � ... _..�......�.. _�-......�........., ..... ... �.... ., ... .. M ......r.a+.w...vn. V..r.�..vr.�yT,.rw^cw.,...^:aMlge..p...'Lew�MC'.Y>il.'�WWKYwT..�.e+:ri.+siw�xu.a�mcwYw.w..+�.......,...�..�..�..... �.... t Bch 14,19% Lodi City Council P. Q Bos 3066 Lodi, CA 95241 RM Garbage Rate lscresse Dar Coupolmembe% I am writing this letter in SUPPORT of our present Recycling Program provided by California Waste Removal Systems, Inc. For several years, the City considered a member of options to bmWb the recycling needs of our City. Finally last year, Lodi adopted a process that is working well. Please dealt jeopardise this successf d program by denying the rate increase. Relying upon the City's support, and designing a program to meet the specifications of the City's Task Force, the local garbage company has responded by purchasing equipment and trucks, and has a strong fhancial investment In this Program. It is my understanding that the original contract spelled out what the rates would be and when a rate increase would be due in order to preserve and protect the success of the Program. Now the garbage company is simply asking the City to hold to Its original contract. As a local business owner, I would hope that the City Of Lodi would honor its contracts. If not, could I be next? Respectfully, Larry K Crump Local Business Owner cc; Lodi News Sentinel Lodi City Council Call Box 3006 Lodi, Ca. 95241 ATTNs City Council Members Dear Council Members, r LJ March 13, 1994 :Frj I have been interested to read of the concerns regarding the proposed garbage rate increase. I wrote to you in support of this recycling program in October, 1992, when there was much debate about beginning this program. I was pleased when the council decided to move ahead with this program. I felt it was economically and environmentally necessary to adopt a workable, solid waste reduction plan. Based on what I read and what I see in my own home, I feel this pian has been very successful. It appears participation in the program is high; therefore, diverting solid waste from the landfill to the recycling center. Since this is one of the aims of AB 939, I believe we are on the right path. I would not want to see Lodi take a step backward in our waste reduction efforts. It appears we have a successful program run by an efficient, locally -owned company. Shouldn't we expect a reasonable rate increase at this time? I would like to see us continue to support the company that has provided this program to us. I hope you will support the rate increase and keep our solid waste reduction program moving ahead. Finally, on,.a social note, it is very encouraging to see our children growing up with the thought that not being involved with recycling and conservation is unacceptable. Let's continue to look ahead as we round a seldom -seen positive corner. Sincerely yours, Brenda Nicholas 517 Tara Place Lodi, Ca. 95240 ( 209 ) 369-7769 , CM OF tool ACTION SWq (�. 6avece 3 /S wtn �ll�k" ?44k lass O aMwMw J�...... :�:�=�0 w►t� y OWN" ' O +M.�o�•r ► D wrwM •x�' D Mrw+ D O OLeft owrM •h0 Mw.wr.CWWWft C Mr. Jack Sieglock Lodi City Council 221 hest Pine St. Lodi, Ca. 95240 March 15, 1994 Dear Councilman Sieglock, I an writing to you to express my support and to encourage you to approve the rate increase for California Waste Removal Systems. In 1992 the existing city council in partnership with California Waste created a waste reduction plan. This plan was to reduce our solid waste as mandated by the State of California. At that time a rate structure was agreed upon by the City Council and California Waste. Because of this agreement California Waste committed a great deal of money to build the facilities needed to implement this reduction plan. It is hard to understand how this agreement could now be revoked. Is California Waste supposed to take down their new building and return their machinery because you have changed your mind? What message will it convey to other businesses who are now doing business in Lodi, or who are considering it? I think that it will show a lack of strength and decisiveness and will reflect on the integrity of our Council. There is one other thing that you should consider and that is this company"s involvement in the community. As a parent of two school age children I an impressed by California Waste's involvement in our schools. The recycling education program provided by Cal. Waste to all our 2nd and 4th graders is excellent. Our students would not be guaranteed exposure to this important issue without this program. In addition, their monetary contribution to our local schools should not be ignored. By contributing, they show a sincere desire to help our schools during a time of decreasing discretionary funds from the state. At our school we have used the recycling donation to provide our students with programs we otherwise would not have been able to fund. I would hate to see either of these programs Jeopardized. I realize that there are members of the community opposing this rate increase, I am sure you have heard from them as well. I wonder if these citizens have taken the time to visit the new recycling center and to see what is going on out there. If they did, I know that they Mould be impressed. California haste has become a leader in recycling technology. We should be proud to have this industry in our city. Please show them your support. Acknowledge the Council's agreement. vote in favor of the rate increase. Thank you for you consideration in the matter, Sincerely, Laurie Forster MM March 15,1994 Lodi City Council City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Dear Council: n I have recently read a number of articles regarding a garbage rate increase in Lodi and once again the subject is surrounded by controversy. I am a resident of Stockton who has had the pleasure of producing some videos for California Waste Removal Systems showing your innovative three cart system. Through this experience, I have had the opportunity to learn about the solid waste industry and to better understand how a variety of different recycling programs work. I think you already know that Lodi is way ahead of other Valley communities in recycling programs and waste reduction. It was only two years ago that I spoke to the council in regards to Lodi's waste reduction program and asked you to accept the three cart system. Now I am asking you to support Lodi's waste reduction system. The increase that California Waste Removal Systems is asking for does not seem unreasonable. Considering that I pay $18.35 per month for one can, a periodical leaf pick-up, and a poorly run recy- cling program. As Councilmembets, you should support Lodi's recycling program. I think a $1.25 per house is a small price to pay in order to sustain a good program. Sincerely, James E. 0 0 0 March 14, 1994 City Council City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Dear Councilmembers: Recently, there has been a lot of publiciLy about incxexsing garbage rates in Lodi and most of it has been against the increase. While it would be nice for costs of services to never increase, let's think about this further. Cilifornia Waste provides a good service to the community; the service they provide is reliable and consistent; their drivers are courteous; they have good trucks; and they provide jobs to our community in these difficult times. California Waste has made it possible for the City of Lodi to meet the guidelines of the State Recycling Laws. This, I'm told, will save the City of Lodi from paying fines of $10,000.00 per day. The increase that California daste is requesting does not seem unreasonable. Consider that areas right outside of Lodi in San Joaquin County will be paying $20.50 per month. That's for one wastecart and no recycling. When the City Council makes it's decision, it should consider all of these things. Yes, no one likes prices to go up, but, let's stop and think about what we're getting. I, and others I have talked with, think the increase is reasonable and I support it. Sincerely, Brian Roek 924 Greenwood Drive Lodi, CA 95240 . .. _ _ - ........_«...... ...�.... ... ....... �..._._ ...........-.Www.Mwwnwmrxrw-arrw��tvwe�cw::rHMlN►'ti1GM.k�bMJUYYi1pM+.W'.'F C To Whom It May Concern: Mike's Upholstery 604 E. Lockeford Lodi, Calif. This letter is in response to the article in Tues"js"Viwbr.Sent�nal dated March 8, 1994 entitled "Ilan Rate Hike in Garbage." Everytime I receive a bill, P.G. & E., phone bill. Auto Insurance, Home Insurance, you name it the rates keep going up. The first thing I ask is am I getting better services for the money and in most cases the answer is no. When it comes to the insurance industry you get less. Now I want to talk about Calif. Waste Removal. I have the weekly waste can and I also go to the transfer facility 2 — 3 times a month. I'm amazed at the amount of activity going on there. New equipment being installed, new buildings going up all to keep pace with -ghat the State of California now requires for the refuse industry. Frankly were running out of room to dump garbage and recycling is the new picture. We have rght here in Lodi a state of the art Refuse/Recycling Facility. An easy drive from anywhere in the city. Calif. Waste is often referred to as exclusive franchise. Get Real, David Vaccarezza and his family reside in Lodi it is a family run business. Any profits this business generates stays in this area, not going to an out of town corporation. I'll take my hat off to Dave and his crew anytime for what there doing at 1333 E. Turner Rd. I wish the Insurance companies only asked for a $1.25 a month increase instead of doubling my premiums. Thanks, .� Michael Pyle Mike's Upholstery 0 ORDIw1lI4 M0. 1590 siffssesffsfsfsfso LODZ, RUZU4 MO ORDIXANCS 1570 = ITS SNTIRS?Y. ARD XW RURS Fm 8094M lam COr.LRCnano !fi•/f!i!!!!sf f!!i!!!f i/f/ff/f/f!i/!fi!!/f!!//f/ffffif/f/lffflfsfff/f!f 82 IT ORDAnMD ST THS CITY OOOI/CIL OF THS CITY O? LORI AS FMLM 3 s==_L, ordinance 1570 is repealed in its entirety. SECTION 2. Pursuant to Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 13.16 - SOLID WXM as it relates to reiidential solid waste collection, the following monthly rates are hereby established: A. For any private dwelling house or residence, the rate for one weekly garbage collection shall be: i' „�. 1. For the first 38-ga22on waste cart provided by the contractor, not exceeding sixty pounds, Fifteen Dollars and Eighty Seven Cents ($25.87); 2. For the second 38 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, not exceeding sixty pounds each, Thirty Nine Dollars and Sixty Eight Cents ($39.68); 3. For the third 38 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, not exceeding sixty pounds each, Sixty Three Dollars and Forty Eight Cents ($63.48); 4. For one 20 -gallon waste cart provided by the contractor, Ten Dollars and Eighty Cents ($10.80). -1- a. Owners or occupants of flats, apartments, mobile haws spaces or the tenants or lessees thereof shall pay an amount equal to Fitteen Dollars and Righty Seven Cents ($15.87) times the number of apartment units or mobile home spaces owned. Bin services requested shall be charged according to the Commercial Rate structure, but in no event shall the City bill the tenants more than the single cart rate. C.. For any residence requesting •backyard service• for the collection of their waste cart(s), there shall be an additional rate of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per month, unless the residence is granted an exemption from the rate by the Citizen's Advisory Board. D. For any residence requesting a commingled recyclables cart(s) Jr. and/or a yard/garden waste cart(s), sufficient to meet its waste diversion needs, there shall be no additional charge. R. Any residential customer may purchase from the city or the franchisee for the price of Five Dollars ($5.00) each, especially markad tags for affixing to trash bags Which will then be collected with routine waste removal service. Such tags may be used to supplement, but not in lieu of other required solid Waste collection services for residences. F. Rates set forth in this Ordinance shall be effective on all bills which are prepared on or afr.er April 1, 1994. -a- -^,......n.+ar...nr<,....awa•n•i-�w.r.�.w•rn:.....u.,a...rsp�.w!ae �rn�+a.,-•. ceu+�' zY.F'!CSS'."kA7ai[d�A':"Ali.i'A.`'Sal"L^$'fieaa3d:�x:c"k.2'�2`�.:.':.'t,'.' SNCTIoty 3- All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. SECTION 4. This is an urgency ordinance under (iovernwent Code Section 36934, and is based on health, safety and welfare considerations arising from the need to collect appropriate fees for waste removal. SECTIOK 5.- This urgency ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinels, a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect immediate-ly. SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lodi hereby finds and .e - declares pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 that such rates are necessary and reasonable for the usual operating expenses of the franchisee, including employee wages and benefits and for the purpose of purchasing facilities, equipment and materials necessary to implement and carry out a Council -mandated recycling program, and for other health and safety purposes. Attest: ZFERPERRIN ity Cler ove this 6th of ch 1 4 JALW A. SIEGLOCK MAYOR -3- State of California County of San Joaquin, as. I, Jennifer M. Perrin, City Clark of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1590 was adopted as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held March 16, 1994, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Mann, Pannino, Snider and Siaglock (Mayor) Noes: Council Members - Davenport Absent: Council Members - None Abstain: Council Members - None I further certify that Ordinance No. 1590 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. 4tyIFRR PRRRIN Cle Approved as to Form BOBBY W. MCNAW City Attorney -4- « _ ORDINANCE 90. 1591 wsssswwwswsssrsssw AN =CODIFM "10 - a ORDINANCE OF THE CITr COUNCIL OF 220 CIT! OF LORI ESTAMSEINO NEN RATES FOR COIOQRCIAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION• AND R1PEALXVG ORDINANCE NO. IS71 X11 ITS ENTIRETY. ssassasssssasasssssssssassasssssssssasassssasassssssasssssssasswawsssss HE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLONS: SECTION 1- Ordinance No. 1571 is repealed in its entirety. SECTION 4, Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 13.16 - SOLID WASTE - as it relates to coswercial solid waste collection monthly rates is hereby amended to read as follows: Monthly rates. A. The monthly rates to be charged for garbage collection service +e - shall be as follows: 1. For owners or tenants of business houses, the monthly rates shall be: A. As set forth in the Commercial Rate Structure schedule attached, when commercial bin service is requested. b. Fifty Five Dollars and Fifty Cents (555.50) per month for once per week collection, when a commercial waste cart provided by the contractor of ninety-five gallons and not to exceed one hundred and fifty pounds is requested. -1- r+w.-r•-.rte-._+.��................ __.. - ..._�.... .� ......�-...-......w......r v.«.. rvwwilrO:.lY:�IIV..� � �MKFPt' c. rate 38 gallon waste cart colledk•ance per geek, Fifteen Dollars and Righty Sewn Cents ($15.87) per month; for two 38 gallon waste carte, Thirty Nine Dollars and Sixty Right Cents ($39.68) per month; and for three 38 gallon waste carts, Sixty Three Dollars and Forty Right Cents ($63.48) per month. a. All of the rate schedules set forth in this section shall be effective on all bills which are prepared on or after April 1, 1994. SECTION 34. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. SECTION 4. This is an urgency ordinance under Government Code Section 36934, and is based on health, safety and welfare considerations arising from the need to collect appropriate fees for waste removal. .e - SECTION S. This urgency ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinel*, a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect immediately. .SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lodi hereby finds and declares pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 that such rates are necessary and reasonable for the usual operating expenses of the franchisee, including employee wages and benefits and for the purpose of purchasing facilities, equipment and materials necessary to implement and carry out a Council -mandated recycling program, and for other health and safety purposes. -2- Attest: t * (P FSR PSRRIN ty Cie State of California County of San Joaquin, ss. 13 roved this 16th eMy of March 1996 A. SISf3L= iiit= I, Jennifer M. Perrin, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1591 was adopted as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held March 16, 1994, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Mann, Pennino, Snider and .r Sieglock (Mayor) Noes: Council Members - Davenport Absent: Council Members - None Abstain: Council Members - None I further certify that Ordinance No. 1591 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. Approved as to Form 191-0 W BOBBY U. MCNAIT City Attorney -3- IFORPHRRIN C ty Clerk _.__.... two Aftk Ptapwwd Apaggee chnent EM � 1. 1994 1 of 2 Told Wil/ FIMPM V / Mhmk a cant mn 1 2 3 4 S 6 1 t $94.29 $188.59 $461.05 $:17.73 $1,91627 $1,917.45 2 =14353 $287.01 $833.34 =1.114.80 $1,731.42 42,4U20 $ $192.7/ $3w"4 $814.8G =1.401.88 ;2,146.56 $3.4&91 4 $242.01 8484.01 5996.30 $1;088.92 $201.72 $3.814.73 6 1291.25 SM49 $1,177.87 41,27539 92,976.87 $4.18030 6 1340.49 $680.96 $1,908136 Z2,2ti gb $SPZ01 $4.74620 7 $359.71 $779.44 $1.540.87 62,550.11 $3&07.17 $4.$1203 9 :438.96 $877.98 $1.72238 82,837.18 44,22231 $3.8/7:78 S $488.19 $078.40 $1.003.89 $3.124.24 $4.837.46 $6.445.8.5 10 5.''+37.43 $1.074,86 32,095.98 $3.41130 $SMSI $7.000.31 2 2 $132.2/ =284.54 8'36x-76 $979.63 $1.x09.14 $2.145.:! 4 $219.48 1438.96 $881.19 $1.418.59 $X111-16 :2,838.90 0 $300.70 $813.98 $1.15682 $1.as7 Ss $2.71a 17 $3.7:12!+0 4 $993.90 $787.81 $1.45204 12,298.60 $3,321.19 $4.520.1) 10 $481.11 $962.22 $1.747.47 $t735.47 $3.920.21 $6.310.11 12 $b68.32 $1,136.66 $2,0423Y $3.114.42 $4,631.13 $6.113.32 14 $655.54 $1,311.07 $2,338.32 ;3,813.37 $5,13624 Vj.W6.02 18 4742.73 $1,485.50 $$633.74 $4,06234 $5,74120 47,700.53 18 $829.96 $1.659.91 $2.029.18 $4.491.29 $6.346.21 $8,494.13 20 $91$.18 $1.634.34 $9.224.60 $4.930.24 $6.95130 $9,287.74 13 3 $110.24 $840.49 5679.W1 $1,131.53 81,6'9act $2,373.13 $ $295.4! $690.85 51,089.04 $1,72238 $2.490.89 *3.394 b6 A $420.61 $841.73 $1,4118.38 $2.313.23 43,,285.78 $4.416.02 12 $545.80 $1.091.59 $1.907.12 S2,W4.08 S4.080.ti8 $3.437.47 15 $670.98 $1,341.97 $2,31707 0,49493 $4.815.55 $6.406.91 19 $796.17 $1.59233 $2.726.42 $4.08.578 Sb.G70.44 $7,480 31 21 $921.35 $1,84271 43.135.77 ,$4.67G.G4 $0.4GS.32 50.501.81 24 $1.046-63 $2.093.07 $3.545.11 $5.167.40 $1.260.211 S9.b23.26 2/ $1,1/1.%.! $2.343.44 $3,954.47 $5,858.34 38.055.09 $10.S44.71 30 $1.296.91 $2.593.81 $4.383.81 48.449.19 $8.64198 $11.566.15 Lao Cwmmwchd Raw D� Nlupuwld Raw Efec N Dole: Apt>f 1, IM TOW aPW11 Fngm" I Week a Con11 bw* 1 4 4 a 12 is ZO 24 25 92 38 40 5 s 10 1S 20 25 30 35 40 4b 50 a 6 12 i$ 24 30 31 42 48 54 60 Attacfimnt page 2 of 2 s 9 s asm 5411.43 $79360 41.283.431 $1.35.87 $2AWN $371.37 :74275 $1,91687 ;2.02816 $,07683 $3.850.90 $534.53 $1..36606 $Imam $2.788.91 ='d.1b6 $&A*65 $897.89 $1.38539 V "41 $3.511.68 $4,840.13 58.348.84 $860.84 $1.721.70 $2.881117 44,264.41 98,824.19 47,691.13 $1024.01 $2A40A1 =3409:94 UAI.lb 46,500.64 $8.047.41 ;1,18!.11 $2.314.34 43.11'3.21 45,739.90 $/./94.49 $19.096.70 $1.350.33 $2.70068 ;/.456,49 $1.45.1.85 $8.779.1b $11,346.89 ;1.81948 $3.028.97 44.919.75 $7,??5.40 $9.783.81 :12585.28 ;1.87&64 $3,365.28 461,603,02 $7.968.14 $10.748.60 $13,544.58 $248.19 $492!7 $907.!x1 $1435.31 $ZQM75 $282881 $447.32 $894.84 11044.72 12.329.98 $33XA37 $4.306.93 $848:41 $1.286.91 $2.181.90 $.1.22460 $442499 $5.78308 11849.51 $1,699.17 $2.919.09 $4.119.24 $5,59901 17180.20 $1.050.72 :2,101.43 $345&48 45.013M $6.774.29 $8.737.34 $1,451.85 52809.70 $4003.47 15.308 S3 67,948.85 1110.214.48 $1.46298 $2,908.97 $4.13066 $6,80.10 =9.123.48 ;11.891.60 $1.164.12 $3.."23 $3„367.85 47,69731 ;10,298.10 413,166.73 $1.855.25 $3,710.49 48.00504 $4.6U45 ;11472.72 ;14.643.85 $2.05638 $4.11275 $8.64222 $9.487.08 $1047.34 $18.12299 4284.17 $568.32 $1.11'11.45 $1.01.21 ;226561 $3.05666 $!aJ.21 $1.096.53 $1.772.35 32.633.74 $:1,630.19 $4,161.63 $762.38 $1.524.75 $2.523.67 $3.680.28 $4,994.80 56,80.6.3 $1.001.48 $2 (10296 43.214.71 $4.726.81 $8.359.08 $8.171.57 $1.240.59 $2,481.17 $4.025.89 45.77336 47,7?3.S.? $1.479.69 ;2.95939 $4.771.00 $6.819.89 $9.000.07 ;11.581.52 $1.718.80 $1,437.60 $6.528.10 ;7.861.43 1110,452-W $19,2W.49 11.95x90 ¢3.915.81 $S.27912 38.912.96 $11,817.04 $14.991.46 $2.197.01 $4.394.02 4703033 $9,959.60 $13.181.64 $16.4136.43 $2,438.11 $4.012x1 41.181-44 $11.008.03 $14,646.03 $15,401.42 0 . W ORDIIIANCB NO. 1592 ssssasssssssssssss AN UNCO®IFISD DRQ3Wr ORDINANCE OF TBE LODI CITY COUNCIL RSPSALINQ ORDINANCE 140. 1563 IN ITS ZWZXRSTr, AND A1fSNDINQ LODI XMCIPAL CODS CBAPTM 13.16, RELATING TO COI UMXAL 10 to SO CUBIC YARD ROLL -OFF BOYSS sssssssssssssasssssassssssssssssssassssassssssssassssasssssassssssssses BB IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL, as follows: SECTION i. Ordinance No. 1563 is hereby repealed in its entirety, and shall be of no further force or effect. SECTION 2. Rates. A. The rates to be charged for commercial 10 to 50 cubic yard roll -off box collection service shall be as follows: .m- 1. For owners or tenants of business houses, the rates shall be as set forth in the Commercial 10 to 50 Cubic Yard Roll -Off Box Rate Structure schedule attached, when such service is requested. B. All of the rate schedules set forth in this section shall be effective on all bills which are prepared on or after April 1, 1994. SECTION 2 All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. -1- _...�..... ..-. _.__ ,..._..__ ... .. _... .. ... _ _... _, ... ,. .. , ..�-e..•;sv r,.,.. �-. .. ,a'l. •r. .:z'w�. 4+1X.'yFCtlraCr.:. .>. _. .. .. SECTION 8. This is an urgency ordinance under Government Code Section 36938, and is based an health, safety and welfare considerations arising from the need to collect appropriate fees for waste removal. SHCPION 5, This urgency ordinance shall be published one time in the •Lodi Neve Sentinels, a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect immediately. SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Lodi hereby finds and declares pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080 that the commercial refuse collection rates established in Ordinance 1563 are necessary and reasonable for the usual operating expenses of the Franchisee, including employee wages and benefits and for the purpose of purchasing facilities, equipment, and materials. ova this th I of Ch 1 8 1 JACWA. SIBGLOCK, Mayor Attest: FHR PERRIN ty Clerk sasrsssasssraarssrasaa:ssaasaa:ssssassasssasaasaassssarsasaraasssarsass .2- State of California County of San Joaquin, on. I, Jennifer M. Perrin, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1592 was adopted as an urgency ordinance at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held March is, 1994, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Mann, Pennino, Snider and Sieglock (Mayor) Noes: Council Members - Davenport Absent: Council Members - None Abstain: Council Members - Nave I further certify that Ordinance No. 1592 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. eh.J 1 fit.".j FHR PBRRIN *tyCIO Approved as to Form BOBBY McNATT City Attorney -3- A- AMb CONTRACT SI5 FRlQDlRCY DROP RkTSS 1. Drop-off/Pick-up $111.00 Charge Per Haat Z. Tons Disposed/Hoz x Processing Charge x$25.00 Processing Charge 3. Franchise Fee (4.8• of 1+2) TOTAL HILL (1+2+3) •.•..•..... OM -TDR DROP RATS .................. 1. Drop-off/Pick-Up $281.30 Charge Per Box 2. Tons Disposed/Hos x Processing Charge x$25.00 Processing Charge 3. Franchise Fee (4.8% of 1+2) TOTAL BILL (1+2+3) ........... __--+•-----. .-. ---_. _......_....--- ----_� :.. .___... ....... ..... ... ..,.....,.�......._,,...,.,ro��::<-...,.a.�rYe'•,,.a!�nt�Ls.a�ci �v8'.t�.ackM:.os:as�swawrrc•:wor....,a...,., .� ..... ,.,...... ,.a.,..