Resolution 2002-27
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY SETTING
MAXIMUM CHARGES FOR THE COLLECTION OF GARBAGE, RUBBISH,
REFUSE AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS
WHEREAS, Chapter 12 of the Gilroy City Code provides that the City of Gilroy ("City") may
contract for the collection, removal and transportation of garbage, rubbish, refuse and recyclable materials
in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City and South Valley Disposal & Recycling, Inc., are currently parties to an
Agreement Between the City of Gilroy and South Valley Disposal & Recycling, Inc. (SVDR), dated
September 2, 1997, ("Franchise Agreement"), and as amended on July 6, 1999, and June 19, 2000, by
which the City granted to SVDR the franchise to collect, transport and dispose of garbage, rubbish, refuse
and recyclable materials produced within the city limits for the benefit and in the interest of the health,
safety and welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Franchise Agreement provides that after the third year of the Franchise
Agreement, the rates and charges set forth in the Agreement shall be subject to adjustments which
correspond to increases or decreases in price indexes in accordance with terms and conditions set forth in
Exhibit "J" of the Franchise Agreement; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to paragraph 10 of the Franchise Agreement, subsection (d) (i) entitled
"Special Requests for Extraordinary Rate Adjustments", SVDR is requesting a one year adjustment
beginning July I, 2002 through June 30, 2003 to cover the costs of Specific Waste Consulting Group's
("Consultant") analysis regarding the City's and SVDR's compliance with waste stream diversion
requirements of AB939; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to paragraph 10 of the Franchise Agreement, subsection (d) (i) described
above, SVDR is requesting a one year increase in rates beginning July I, 2002 to cover the first
$25,000.00 of Consultant's costs for an audit of SVDR's performance under the Franchise Agreement;
and
UH\550153.1
01-041704706002
-1-
Resolution No. 2002-26
UHI550153.1
01~41704706002
-2-
Resolution No. 2002-26
WHEREAS, the increase in rates due to these Consultant's reports will be for this one year only,
and will be subtracted out of the rates beginning July I, 2003 so as not to create a new basis for
adjustments corresponding to increases or decreases in price indexes; and
WHEREAS, the documentation for this rate adjustment is set forth in City Staff Memos dated
March 21, 2002 and letters from SVDR dated February 12, 2002 and April 8, 2002, attached hereto as
Exhibit B.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby
adopts the maximum charges and rates for collection of garbage, rubbish, refuse and recyclable materials
as adjusted in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit "J" of the Franchise
Agreement, and such charges and rates set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference, to become effective on July I, 2002.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of April, 2002, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ARELLANO, DILLON, GARTMAN,
MORALES, PINHEIRO, VELASCO, and
SPRINGER
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
APPROVED:
~
Thomas W. Springer,
~ud~
Rhonda Pellin, City Clerk
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING, INC.
CITY OF GILROY
RATES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002
DESCRIPTION
Current
Rates
Add
1.35%
New
Rates
1. Residential Customers and Multi-Familv Can Customers (/ncludinq Recvclinq).
1-Can 20.24 0.27 20.51
2-Cans 29.03 0.39 29.42
3-Cans 38.07 0.51 38.58
~_ ~.~ O.w ~.~
Each Additional Can 10.62 0.14 10.76
Extra Can/Bag Tag 4.25 0.06 4.31
Bulky Item Pickup (Plus Disposal Cost) 12.75 0.17 12.92
Toter Subscription Changes 10.62 0.14 10.76
Low Income Senior
1-Can
2-Cans
3-Cans
4-Cans
Hillside
1-Can
2-Cans
3-Cans
4-Cans
2. Multi.Familv Bin Customer Recvclinq
Per Unit Charge
For recycling service only
(option to choose Commercial Service)
17.04
24.25
31.74
39.23
24.44
34.82
45.44
56.07
1.60
3. Commercial and Multi.Familv Bin Customer (Refuse)
1-Can 20.24
2-Cans 30.63
3-Cans 41.26
~CaM 51.~
Each Additional Can 11.50
4. Commercial Front Loader Service Rates
2 Yard F/L (1x/wk)
2 Yard F/L (2x/wk)
2 Yard F/L (3xlwk)
2 Yard F/L (4x1wk)
2 Yard F/L (5x/wk)
2 Yard F/L (6x/wk)
2 Yard F/L (on call)
3 Yard F/L (1x/wk)
3 Yard F/L (2x/wk)
RateJncr_2002xls
EXH'B"i~'
13562
254.59
373.56
492.56
611.53
730.50
8829
195.43
368.29
0.23
0.33
0.43
0.53
0.33
0.47
0.61
0.76
0.02
0,27
0.41
0.56
0.70
0.16
183
3.44
5.04
665
8.26
9.86
1.19
2.64
497
17.27
24.58
.3217
39.76
24.77
35.29
46.05
56.83
1.62
20.51
31.04
41.82
52.58
11.66
13745
25803
378.60
499.21
619.79
740.36
89.48
198.07
37326
2/8/2002 1 :34 PM
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING, INC.
CITY OF GILROY
RATES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002
Current Add New
DESCRIPTION Rates 1.35% Rates
3 Yard F/L (3x/wk) 541.13 7.31 54844
3 Yard F/L (4x/wk) 713.99 9.64 723.63
3 Yard F/L (5x/wk) 886.85 11.97 898.82
3 Yard F/L (6x/wk) 1,059.69 14.31 1,074.00
3 Yard F/L (on call) 125.87 1.70 127.57
4 Yard F/L (1x1wk) 262.14 3.54 265.68
4 Yard F/L (2x1wk) 495.90 6.69 502.59
4 Yard F/L (3x/wk) 72966 9.85 739.51
4 Yard F/L (4x/wk) 96342 13.01 97643
4 Yard F/L (5x/wk) 1,197.18 16.16 1,213.34
4 Yard F/L (6x/wk) 1,430.95 1932 1,450.27
4 Yard F/L (on call) 174.84 2.36 177.20
6 Yard F/L (1x/wk) 381.75 5.15 386.90
6 Yard F/L (2x/wk) 725.96 9.80 735.76
6 Yard F/L (3x/wk) 1,070.18 1445 1,084.63
6 Yard F/L (4x/wk) 1,414.39 19.09 1,43348
6 Yard F/L (5x/wk) 1,75859 23.74 1,782.33
6 Yard F/L (6x/wk) 2,102.79 28.39 2,131.18
6 Yard F/L (on call) 239.70 3.24 242.94
Front Loader Special (per cubic yard) 14.57 0.20 1477
5. Compactor Service
Front Loader (per cubic yard) 3115 042 31.57
3-yd F/L compactor (1 x/wk) 405.70 548 411.18
3-yd F/L compactor (2x/wk) 810.52 10.94 82146
3-yd F/L compactor (3x/wk) 1,215.34 1641 1,231.75
6. Debris Box Rates
20 Cubic Yard Debris Box, 330.08 446 33454
Per ton charge (over 3 tons) 63.75 0.86 6461
40 Cubic Yard Debris Box, 550.06 743 55749
Per ton charge (over 6 tons) 63.75 0.86 6461
Debris Box Compactors 3115 042 31.57
(per cubic yard of capacity)
20 Cubic Yard Debris Box (recyclable) 20445 2.76 207.21
40 Cubic Yard Debris Box (recyclable) 36183 4.88 36671
7. Additional Street Sweepina
M-F 800am-500pm (Per Hour) 78.35 1.06 7941
Sat-Sun 8:00am-5:00pm.Per Hr+4hr Minimum 13059 176 132 35
RateJncr_2002xls
Exhibit 3
2/8/2002 134 PM
04/16/02 Tlm 09:59 FAX 408 846 0500
CITY OF GILROY
......... CITY ATTY
14J002
CITY OF Gn..ROY
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 21, 2002
TO: Jay Baksa, City Administrator
~i'
/.'
FROM: Lisa Jensema, Environmental Programs Coordinat0f';'
I '
. j
SUBJECT: Rate Increase for South Valley Disposal & Recycling
I...........~.......................~.......................................
Backl!'round:
On February 12, South Valley Disposal & Recycling (SVDR) submitted a request for a
1.35% adjustment to the collection rates to be effective July 1, 2002. Under the franchise
agreement, SVDR is allowed an annual rate adjustment comprised of the Consumer Price
Index and Motor Fuel Index- Staff has reviewed this request and supporting
documentation and has determined that it satisfies the formula approved in Exhibit "1"
Section A through E of the franchise agreement dated July 1, 1997 between the City and
SVDR The agreement states that SVOR is allowed a rate adjustment using a formula of
70% of the Consumer Price Index and 10% of the Motor Fuel Index.
One additional element of this rate increase is the inclusion of consulting fees to be paid
by SVDR to assist the City in meeting State AB 939 requirements reducing the waste
stream by 50%, A consultant has completed a study for the City, which shows that our
AB 939 diversion is between 50-55%. It is expected that the California Integrated Waste
Management Board (CIWMB) will approve this study at a board meeting in September.
A "Gilroy Recycles 2" program has been developed by the consultant that will take
. Gilroy to the next level of meeting the State AB 939 requirements. This is an important
function as the CIWMB will be looking at further programs and good faith efforts that
Gilroy will be accomplishing to ensure this goal is maintained and or expanded in future
years. The consultant's study will involve increasing commercial recycling opportunities,
sludge diversion from the sewer treatment plant, special event recycling such as the
Garlic Festival, and a construction and demolition ordinance to encourage commercial
construction projects to recycle,
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City approve SVDR's request for a rate adjustment of 1.35%
to be effective July 1, 2002.
attachment: Letter dated February 12,2002 re: SVDR's requesl for a rolle adjustment
EXHIBIT B
"2I.0.1.
04/16/02 Tl~ 09:59 FAX 408 846 0500
CITY OF GILROY
~...... CITY A'ITY
I4J 003
People. Service. Environmetlt
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL & RECYCLING, INC.
February 12,2002
,
City of Gilroy
Mr. Jay Baksa
City Adminstrator
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
Re: July 2002 Rate Adjustment
Dear Mr. Baksa:
As outlined in Exhibit "J" section A thru E of the September 7, 1997 franchise
agreement, we submit our request for adjustment to the collection rates effective July I,
2002. Attached are the following exhibits;
Exhibit 1 - CPl Calculation
CPl calculation using the formula described in Exhibit "J" of the franchise agreement for
the Consumer Price Index and the Motor Fuel Index. We have also calculated the
increase necessary to cover consulting fees paid by SVD&R (net of franchise fecs).
,
Exhibit 2A - CPI Documentation
Copy of fax from the U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics displaying
the.required values of the CPI calculation.
Exhibit 2B Motor Fuel Index Documentation
Copy of fax ii-om the U.S. Department of Labor - Bureau of Labor Statistics displaying
the required valucs ofthe MFI calculation.
Exhibit 3 - Rate Schedule
This table applies the combined CPi factor to the current rates and calculates the adjusted
rates for July 1, 2002.
Should you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (408)
847-5700.
ii:# I! ;Jd
Keith Hester
General Manager
7110 ALEXANDER STREET' GILROY, CA 95020 . TELEPHONE (408) 842-3358' FIV< (408) 642-5664
An Employee-Owned Ccnnp''''y
txmBlf@ B
__,~/16/02 Tlm 09:59 FAX 408 846 0500
CITY OF GILROY
...... CITY A'ITY
~004
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING, INC.
CITY OF GILROY
RATE ADJUSTMENT
EFFECTIVE JUL. Y 1, 2002
CPI RATE ADJUSTMENT
Formula outlined in Exhibit "J" Section A thru E of the X (I) - X (1-2)
September 2, 1997 Franchise Agreement X (1-2)
Comiumer Price Index Values
X (I) = December, 2001 =
X (1-2) = December, 2000 =
1906
184.1
CP\=
190.6-184.1
184.1
CPI =
70% of CPI = II
3.53%
2.470/~11
Motor Fuel Index Values
X (I) = December, 2001 =
X (1-2) = December, 2000 =
107.1
141.7
MFI = 107.1-141.7
141.7
MFI= -24.42%
10% of MFI = ~ -2.44%11
SDeciaJ One Time Adiustments Monthly Yearly
Residential Revenue 214,137 2,569,644
Commercial Revenue 294,167 3,530,004
Debris Box Revenue 105,444 1,265,328
Total Revenue: 7,364,976
Consulting Fees Paid By SVD&R 97,000
Total Special one Time Adjustments: II 1.32%11
Grand Total Rate Increase Percentage: II 1.35%]
Rate_lncr _2002.xls
EXHfBff B
2/8/2002 1 :34 PM
,04/16/02 Tlm 10:00 FAX 408 846 0500
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS (415)
CITY OF GILROY
975-4567
.. '
" ...
"
-=e
_ "
"" -
....
"0
.....~
..
~~
,. E
.. u
" ~
- ..
='"
",-
-< ..
- ~.
...eo
~ ~
"" "
:z. u
0-1:
. u
=-< ~ ~
..0( l.... "Z
IlIil .s >,p-
... -0
.. Ii-
.. "...
lI!!l't; ,lw
=' ......~
IIU In ';
~jQt~
_iZ...;
-;<0
,. -..
.....~
..... ..
,,= "
~:i~
:; q~'
_ >< .:-
:<.~
,,'" ..
2.u 8.l
t-<"c=
- "
" .
..-
~:5
;;~
.~ ~ ~
"" .. "
....,
" -
.., DC
c~
.....
;... S ...
a::::
.C 5
...
~
..
c~~
is;:
... " ~
= c G;I
.g1i:=
... u "
-s~
.. ".:-
.......:-
.. ..~
...... ..
~A~
- .. E
= ~ ~
"'." g
~J1~
.. :i -
~=~
-"-
,,"''''
.;: ~ ~
= . =.
o ~ ~
:a~~
.!! 11"", eo
"I~""
,. . ~
war, iii
~:;~
"I::I~t:
~ .... 0
... . -
IlII :'.-
::c ~-
r-oeo:
-
..:-
.:-..
:::~
...-.:
.. "
~~
5~
I-'l
C
<
llli'
"'~
~~
~;:..
=r:::
l:5u
~.
u~
....~
~Q
llli~
;:;'"
""es
;;>~
"'......
Zu
Ou
u....
""
....
~
""'
..
'" ..
1lOl'i
~ ~
Q:;
i5 0
'" ..
~ :
loil'i!
!:: "
...'"
...0
<--:
...
..
,
N
..
~
....
-
;;;
..
.u
o
"
CPI DOCUMENTATION
mM~~~=
a~iiQ~
~ rl ... ·
~e r~~
a'= ~ :g
tl .. : ~ > s
g ~
~
..
I
...
f;l g
" '"
.,
i ~ ~
H
"
"
;;,
~
!'l
rj ~
.. ..
.. ...
-<
<=>
=
....
co
;oj
..,
:;:
"l
U
..
=0
j
il:!~~
m jlI.j >01 'S .1""1
~ . ~ ~
~
s
o E
.. ..
" ..
'"
:l
i ~ S
!il ~ ~
H
u g
~ ~
RateJnc:r_2002.xls
'"
"
,
.. '"
. . .
.. "
,
..,
..;
.. '"
~ ~
~
...
'" ..
ti I N
.,
"
,
..,
...
~
.
'"
~ 0 ~ ~ m _ ~ ~ N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~
~ " ~ 0 ~ . ~ w "
_ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ " "
t-o ro"I to- II'l
..
~
...
.., ...
~ ...
... '"
I'- III t'- r. CD g
.
'"
...
...
go Qil \CI N
~ m ~::
~
. .
...
r; I" 111
...
'"
....
...
.;
.. ~
... ... ..
.... ,.. It'l r-o r. ....
10 ~ IlIEI r-. !:II ...
U1 .... r'II .... N r1
'" .. ~
a:t rf ~ CIQI
~ ~ ~ ~
...
.,
N
~
.;
...
.
..,
~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
\OC'\r--~.-4~f"'IOlrt
~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ M ~ ~ N ~ ~ "
. .., .-1
...... ..
~ .., ~
... ., ...
~ ~ r: '"::
.
..
N
., ..
.. ...
... ..
., .-1
. .. ...
.. Q ...
....., ...
Q 9"4 ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~
. ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M N ~
'"
~
..
ll'
~
.. ..
;> ..
.. .-1
.
......
., ..
... ..
" !:!
.;
s'
..
i
~
o
~
...
.
~
..
;>
... ..
'" "
....
.. .
. ..
... ..
. '"
!l'::.
..
..
oS
i
..
-
..
"
...
.
...
~
'"
...
;;
Q
...
.
~
s=
.. ....
...
, 0
.
~s
'" .
.-1 .
V
....
..
I
...
..
:
on
..
,
..,
...
.,
.;
"'
.;
..
.;
EX_ 8
D :c J
.. ..
e'E
...
..
:
.,
..
~
"-H CITY ATrY
02-06-02 04: 18p
] !l'" <:
-..J......Q
i 1" ..
'"
t5 'S
... r ~ ~
.. ....
.. '"
>4 C ti g
Q '"
.-1
! ~
..
!:l,.; ;;I
~ 15 !:
...
~ g
.. "
.. "
u :;;:
DI~~
~ ~ g
.. 11 ....
.. .. t ~
0'"
....
II g
co '"
I ~ ~
~
'"
"
,
...
~
,
--~--------------~m-------
'fir ..-I .... ~ ... .... .... ti'su8 ~ Q
~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ i 1 ~ ~ ~ ~
.. ...
...
"'
'"
..,
...
":
.
'"
..,
U\ l;J ... N
~ II;! ..11:'-0
11;I Ul lIlII ...,
f""I Ion ~ lI'1
In Q ..t ~
t>- 11"1 ~ Pi
121 ~ . ...
... t.n'" In
t'I .. Q go
.
.,
...
.,
.
.. .. ~
.. . ...
...., ...
.,
"
.,
.:
~
..
..
"
@g:~~
Ch a;I m \D
" ll'I .... ITI
~ N Ch r-
" "" r-- ('lI
I:n m _ r-
... It'i ... ~
v g
m :::
@.;~.-1'"
ClQ ~ m 111
'"' 111 f"'I It'I
'" '"
~
I
,
H
..
G
..
o
.,
~ co
'" 0
, ...
'" ~
co ..
j;EQ
b ~ I ~
Q II 0 .
. ~ 0 .....
[1 :: ~ ::
~ : ~ =-
~ ..
.. ...
..
ii =
.. ..
..
...
.
...
..
..,
'"
..
..
...
,.
..
..
..
..
..
..
....
..
"
1liI005
P11ge 02
on
..
..
..
,
M
"'
.,
'"
..
'"
..
....
..
...
..
.
'"
'" Q
.., '"
"' M
'" ..
, ,
... .,
"' ...
., ~
'" on
... ....
'" ..
o
Q
..
...
o 0
i ~
... ...
.. ..
~ iI
.. ..
.. ...
.. ..
'" ..
'" ...
, .
'" '"
'" ...
'" ..,
.. '"
... ..
.., on
..
..
..
.. '"
!]
.,
. ~
oS Ii.
... "
.. "
" 0;>
... ..
..
.....;
i:''''
.. ...
" "
~ =
.. ..
"
. 0
.,..
..
"'..
..
.. ..
.. "
.. '"
. .
~ ...
.. "
" ..
" ..
~ "
~ ..
... '"
, ,
.... ...
... ..
.. .,
... ;-
.. "
~ ..
..
'" "
~ ';
II '0
! !
..
.-1
..
...
o
~
...
A
.,
..
..
"
.
...
...
..
..
...
.0
..
...
...
..
~
..
o
'"
..,
o
..
2/8/2002 1: 33 PM
'"
..
..
"
N
"
..
...
g
...
...
..
...
.
go
o.
"
...
..
"
..
.
..
.0
.
..
"
o
..
"
..
..
..,
..
H
~~
. ..,
.. ..
.. '
"'
.. ~
... ..
.. "'
... .-1
-3~
.. .-1
.. ..,
.. ..
.. "
H
. .
" 0
...
".,
3 a
. 0
n:
...
..
.. ..
.. ..
. ~
..
'" "
.. 0
..
..
"
.,
..;
.
..
'"
...
..
..
.
.-1
"
....
..
.
.
..
..
,.
o
'"
e
o
o
...
...
..
..
"
g-
O>
..
0;>
"
..
..
on
..;
..
..
.
..
..
..
...
u
..
..
...
..
.
.04/16/02 Tl~ 10:00 FAX 408 846 0500 CITY OF GILROY
5UREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS (415) 975-4567
.H., CITY AITY ~006
Dl-07-02 O~:21a ~age Qq
CPI DOCUMENTATION
Consumer Price Index for All Urban C01"sume:rs (CPI-U): IndaxlSls and per~nt changes for selected
peMods
San Franciseo-Oakland-San Jose CA r1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted'
IndexM Pe rcent change from-
item and Group Oct. NOlI. D~ Dee. Oct- Nolt.
2001 2001 2001 2000 2001 2001
cXp"ndilure category
AI items ~...............d.........._.................n..'''''''' 191.7 . r190.6 DI3.5 -0.6 .
All items (1967~100) ....................................... S89.2 - 5B6.t .- - .
Food and bevera!18s ...._...........................~._n_ 183.3 - t82.9 2.8 . -0.2 .
Food.......n...................................................... 183.5 . 183.1 2.8 -0.2 .
Food a2 home ....u......n................................. 188.9 187.7 188.3 2.6 ..0.3 0.3
Food away from home .................................. 177.4 . 177.5 2.6 O.t .
Alcoholic beveraR"" ......................-............... 185.0 . 183.9 4.5 .{j.6 .
Housin~ ........... ......__.......... ........n.................. 219.9 . 220.2 8.0 0.1 -
Shelter ....,...................................................... 250.2 249.2 249.6 9.0 ..0.2 02
Renl of primary residence (1 )........................ 260.5 200.6 261.9 9.4 0.5 0.5
OWners' equivalent rent of primary
residence ill (2) .........--............................ 269.2 269.8 271.0 904 0.7 0.4
Fuels and utilities ...._....................................,. 170.4 - 182.8 8.9 4.2 -
Fuels ._....._..~u...... .._.........._n........ ....... .......... 178.9 178.8 186.9 10.0 4.S 4.0
Ga. (piped) and electricity (1).._................... 178,5 178.7 187.1 10.6 4.8 4.7
Electrioitv (1 ).........................._....... ............, 233.7 223.3 223.3 41.3 --4.5 0.0
Utility natural ~as &eNice (1)_..._................. 99.1 118.3 142.3 -31.0 43.6 20.3
HOIJsehold fumishings and OP"ralions .......... 130.6 . 131.5 -0.2 0.7 .
Apparel .............. .-...............,......".II...II......~... 110.4 - 103.5 -8.3 -6.3 .
Transponation ................................................. t42.7 . 138.5 ~ -2.9 .
FJorivate transpOrtation ...................................... 135.5 . 131..1l .3.3 .
Motorfuel.............____...__......... 133.0 123.7. ("107.1 )1"" .24.4 -19.5 -13.4
Gasoline (alllypes) .-.-................................ 131.5 122.3 -, 05.8 -24,4 -19.5 -13.5
, Gasolinel unleaded regular (3}._................. 129.2 lt9.9 103.2 -252 -20.1 -13.9
Gasoline. unleaded mlclRrede (3) (4)_......... 125.4 116,5 101.5 .23.9 .19.1 -12.9
Gasoline, unleaded premium (3)................. 130.4 122.2 106.8 -22.6 .18.1 -12.6
Medical care .............._...._.....................-...... 255.8 - 261.0 4.8 2.0 -
. Recreation (5)................................_................ 93.4 . 93.3 .2.2 .(J.t -
cduo:atJon and communication (5)................... 110.3 . 110.1 3.9 -0.2 -
Other """ds ~nA sel'llices ................. ....-_..... 305.3 - 306.4 3.6 004 .
~e footnotes at end of table.
RaleJncr_2002.xls
EXfilBff B
2/8/2002 1:34 PM
_____~04/16/02 11m 10:00 FAX 408 846 0500
;
CITY OF GILROY
. .
-+-+07 CITY ATI'Y
141007
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING, INC.
CITY OF GILROY
RATES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002
DESCRIPTION
Current
Rates
Add
1.35%
New
RatelS
1. Residential Customers and Multi-Familv Can Customers (lnc/udincr ReevclinaJ,
1-Can 20.24 0.27 20.51
2-Cans 29.03 0.39 29.42
3-Cans 38.07 0.51 38.58
4-Cans 48.69 0.66 49.35
Each Additional Can 10.62 0.14 10.76
Extra Can/Bag Tag 4.25 0.06 4.31
Bulky Item Pickup (Plus Disposal Cost) 12.75 0.17 12.92
Toter Subscription Changes 10.62 0.14 10.76
Low Income Senior
1-Can
2.Cans
3-Cans
4-Cans
Hillside
1-Can
2-Cans
3-Cans
4-Cans
2. Multi-Familv Bin Customer Recvclincr
Per Unit Charge
For recycling service only
(option to choose Commercial Service)
17.04
24.25
31.74
39.23
24.44
34.82
45.44
56.07
1.60
3. Commereial and Multi-Familv Bin Customer (Refusel
1-Can 20.24
2-Cans 30.63
3.Cans 41.26
4-Cans 51.88
Each Additional Can 11.50
4. Commercial Front Loader Service Rates
2 Yard F/L (1xJwk)
2 Yard F/L (2xtwk)
2 Yard F/L (3x1wk)
2 Yard F/L (4xJwk)
2 Yard F/L (5x/Wk)
2 Yard F/L (6x1wk)
2 Yard FIL (on call)
3 Yard F/L (1x/Wk)
3 Yard F/L (2xfwk)
Rale_lncr_2002.xls
EXHIBIT B
135.62
254.59
373.56
492.56
611.53
730.50
88.29
195.43
368.29
0.23
0.33
0.43
0.53
0.33
0.47
0.61
0.76
0.02
0.27
0.41
0.56
0.70
0.16
1.83
3.44
5.04
6.65
8.26
9.86
1.19
2.64
4.97
17.27
24.58
32.17
39.76
24.77
35.29
46.05
56.83
1.62
20.51
31.04
41.82
52.58
11.66
137.45
258.03
378.60
499.21
619.79
740.36
89.48
198.07
373.26
2/812002 1 ;34 PM
04/1~02 Tlm 10:01 FAX 408 846 0500
CITY OF GILROY
. . .
H-+ CITY ATI'Y
1lJ008
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING, INC.
CITY OF GILROY
RATES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002
DESCRIPTION
3 Yare FIL (3x1wk)
3 Yard FIL (4x1wk)
3 Y..rd FIL (5x1wk)
3 Yard FIL (6x1wk)
3 Yard FIL (on call)
4 Yare FIL (1x1wk)
4 Yard FIL (2x1wk)
4 Yard FIL (3x1wk)
4 Yard FIL (4x1wk)
4 Yard FIL (5x1wk)
4 Yard F/L (6x1wk)
4 Yard FIL (on call)
6 Yard FIL (1x1wk)
6 Yard F /L (2x1wk)
6 Y..rd FIL (3x1wk)
6 Yard FIL (4x1wk)
6 Yard FIL (5x1wk)
6 Yard FIL (6x1wk)
6 Yard F/L (on call)
Front Loader Special (per cubic yard)
5. ComDactor Service
Front Loader (per cubic yard)
3-yd FIL compactor (1x/wk)
3-yd F/L compactor (2xlwk)
3-yd F/L compactor (3x1wk)
6. Debris Box Rates
20 Cubic Yard Debris Box,
Per ton charge (over 3 tons)
40 Cubic Yard Debris Box,
Per ton charge (over 6 tons)
Debris Box Compactors
(per cubic yard of capacity)
20 Cubic Yard Debris Box (recyclable)
40 Cubic Yard Debris Box (recyclable)
7. Additional Street SweeDlna
M-F 8:00am-5:00pm (Per Hour)
Sat-Sun 8:00am-5:00pm-Per Hr+4hr Minimum
RateJncr_2002.xls
EXlIIBlr 8
Current
Rates
541.13
713.99
886.85
1,059.69
125.87
262.14
495.90
729.66
963.42
1,197.18
1,430.95
174.84
381.75
725.96
1,07018
1,414.39
1.758.59
2,102.79
239.70
14.57
31.15
405.70
810.52
1,215.34
330.08
63.75
550.06
63.75
31.15
204.45
361.83
78.35
130.59
Add
1.35%
7.31
9.84
11.97
14.31
1.70
3.54
6.69
9.85
13.01
16.16
19.32
2.36
5.15
9.80
14.45
19.09
23.74
28.39
3.24
0.20
0.42
5.48
10.94
16.41
4.46
0.86
7.43
0.86
0.42
2.76
4.88
1.06
1.76
New
Rates
548.44
723,63
898.82
1,074.00
127.57
265.68
502.59
739.51
976.43
1,213.34
1,450.27
17720
386.90
735.76
1.084.63
1,433.48
1,782.33
2.131.18
242.94
14.77
31.57
411.18
821.46
1,231.75
334.54
64.61
557.49
64.61
31.57
207.21
366.71
79.41
132.35
2/812002 1 :34 PM
.
People. Service. Environment
SOUTH VALLEY DISPOSAL & RECYCLING, INC.
TO:
FROM:
Mr. Jay Saksa, City Administrator
City of Gilroy
Keith Hester, General Manger I/' Jk
South Valley Disposal and ReCYCling~"V
RE:
Rate Adjustment
DATE:
April 8, 2002
The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify some issues with regard to the.
commercial recycling program within the City of Gilroy, as well reviewing the
process of payment to third party consultants, and specifically what is
recoverable through the rate structure.
First I will address the current commercial recycling programs. Prior to January
1, 2001 South Valley Disposal (SVDR) did charge for commercial bin recycling
as per the agreement rate structure. However, due to the low program
anticipation, even with the bin recycling rates 30% lower than the garbage rates,
a decision was made to offer commercial recycling at no charge at all. That
change went into effect on January 1, 2001. The customers who were being
charged were sent a letter stating that the service would no longer be at a cost,
and the billing was stopped. The "no charge" recycling has been received
favorably by those who wish to recycle. However, even after promoting the
program the number of businesses participating as of today is 395. The total
number of commercial customers in the City of Gilroy is 710. The Recycling
Coordinator for SVDR, Julie Osborne, has reached out to the public via mailers
as well as personal contacts, but the recurring issues we hear form the business
community are 1) they do not have room for a second container, and 2) they do
not wish to take the time to separate out recyclables form the waste, nor have
their employees do so. This mindset is difficult to overcome, which leads me to
my next point.
The best incentive for a commercial business is typically monetary. For a
generator of substantial mixed paper and cardboard, there is opportunity to
reduce the level of garbage service they currently are utilizing. For example, if
some businesses were to be diligent in recycling, they may be able to reduce
form a 3-yard bin to a 2-yard bin, or some other combination. That creates a
7110 A.lEXANOER STREET. GilROY. CA 95020 . TELEPHONE (408) 842-3358' fAX (408) 842-5664
An E-mployee-Oumed Company
PRI"mJJmf B
---:2JI . A - I .
financial incentive to recycle the materials. The other portion of the recycling
promotion is from an environmental standpoint. However, there are many who
disregard this as not worthy of the efforts. Even that can have future fiscal
implications to the City and ultimately the customers. Not diverting waste fills up
the landfills more quickly and escalates the prices at the landfills; essentially the
supply and demand of simple economics. The other fiscal issue is the looming
state penalties for non-compliance. Although Gilroy appears to have exceeded
its state mandated waste diversion goals, those goals may escalate upwards in
the futu re.
Over the past two years Julie Osborne and Lisa Jensema have worked closely to
determine the best approach to bringing additional commercial recycling
customers into a recycling program. Specifically, they have completed the
following and continue to work through these public outreach tools:
· Mailers have been sent out to commercial customers advising them of the
available recycling programs to them.
· Channel 17 Public Information Television has been utilized to discuss and
promote recycling and recycling programs.
. Newspaper advertisements in the Gilroy Dispatch.
· Commercial customers who currently are recycling were sent a letter on
July 9, 2001 as a reminder of the options for container sizes, carts or bins,
and an extensive list of what can be included in the recycling containers.
· In addition to individual mailers, Julie Osborne and Lisa Jensema
approached GUSD and started the schools on a recycling program using
96-gallon carts for mixed paper and mixed recyclables. For the schools
that generate a substantial volume of cardboard, they were given bins for
cardboard only.
· Each month in the Gilroy Chamber of Commerce paper an ad is featured
that speCifically asks the question "Does Your Business Recycle"? It
goes on to list Julie Osborne's name, phone number, and encouragement
to sign up. .
· Julie has been door to door with a number of businesses promoting the
recycling program, with some successes.
. Currently SVDR and the City of Gilroy are working together to develop a
comprehensive recycling program for the Garlic Festival. Last year at the
Garlic Festival, SVDR did place cardboard recycling containers on site,
but it can be improved upon this year.
. SVDR and the City of Gilroy have been actively pursuing additional
commercial recycling customers, and will continue to do so.
. This July, the recycling program will expand to accept plastics #3 through
#7.
Finally I wish to address the payment of the consultant as well as the percentage
of franchise fees remitted to the City. In the agreement with the City of Gilroy
SVDR remits to the City a franchise and administrative fee totaling 9%.
EXHIBIT B
,
.
.
Additionally according to the agreement SVDR has the capability to recover the
expense of retaining a consultant through the rate structure. It was at the City's
request that the consultant be retained to further enhance its diversion volumes.
As you are aware, the California Integrated Waste Management Board continues
to apply pressure to cities and counties for greater diversion percentages. As
such additional "digging" and programs will need to be initiated. The most
efficient way for the consultant to be paid is to invoice SVDR and place the
consulting payment(s) in the rate base for a one-year period. On page twenty-
seven (27) of the agreement between SVDR and the City of Gilroy, it states that
the "Contractor shall have the option of filing a special request, with supporting
documentation, for an adjustment to the rates to recover any significantly
increased costs that Contractor can demonstrate have resulted from
extraordinary and unanticipated changes in circumstances occurring during tlJP'
term of this Agreement..." Those circumstances include "other extraordinary
events or circumstances beyond the reasonable control and anticipation of the
Contractor." The consulting fees would fall into the above category as an
unanticipated circumstance and expense.
The other consulting fee being considered currently is that of the five-yea~
performance audit. SVDR is obligated to pay the first $25,000 of this .
performance audit and the agreement allows for the pass through of this fee as'
well, so as not to cut into the City's budget. The City of Gilroy's philosophy has
been to work on a cost-basis for extraordinary fees, rather than place them in the,
operating budget.
The contrast to this philosophy as opposed to Morgan Hill is that Morgan Hill
chooses to have a higher franchise fee, 16%, and to pay for the consultants from
its operating budget. SVDR did pay $7296.75 to the City of Morgan Hill for the
last performance audit. This fee is clearly spelled out as a fee the Contractor is
obligated to reimburse the City of Morgan Hill. However, with that stated, SVDR
did pay $11,996.63 to Pacific Waste Consulting Group during 2001 without
reimbursement. This was done outside of the confines of the agreement as a
good faith effort. Therefore, SVDR actually has remitted more money on behalf
of the City of Gilroy than it has on Morgan Hill. One last item of extreme
importance is that SVDR pays for the garbage and yard waste carts, as well as
the recycling tubs from our capital, and we pay the depreciation on them.
Morgan Hill raised its franchise fees to pay for their own yard waste and recycling
containers, rather than have SVDR expend the capital. We have no debt
obligation or monthly amortization expense for the City of Morgan Hill's
containers.
Essentially there are two methods of thinking; in Gilroy it is to pay for consultants
as necessary, and have SVDR expend it's capital for carts and tubs. Morgan Hill
has a different philosophy; to retain a greater franchise fee for the budget and to
pay for consultants from their budget. They also choose to purchase their own
EXHIBIT B
I
I
containers. The end result seems to show much equity between the two
agreements.
I will be in attendance at the April 15, 2002 City Council Meeting and I look
forward to presenting this information to the Mayor and Council at that time.
EXHIBIT B
I, RHONDA PELLIN, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certify that the attached
Resolution No. 2002-26 is an original resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of
Gilroy at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 15th day of April, 2002, at which meeting
a quorum was present.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of
the City of Gilroy this 25th day of April, 2002.
dP~~'
City lerk of the .City of Gilroy
( Seal)
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-27
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GILROY APPROVING APPLICATION SPE 02-01, AN
APPLICATION FOR A SMALL PROJECT EXEMPTION FROM
THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, APN 790-
16-061
WHEREAS, Mark Hewell, c/o MH Engineering, ("Applicant") submitted Application SPE
02-01, requesting a Small Project Exemption from the Residential Development Ordinance
("RDO'') for the purpose of constructing up to 11 single-family housing units ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council may grant the requested RDO exemption only if it determines
that it meets the criteria set forth in Zoning Ordinance section 50.62(b)(1), which criteria is set forth
and fully discussed in the Staff Report dated March 22, 2002, revised April 8, 2002, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that the review and approval of an application for a
Small Project Exemption from the RDO does not confer any entitlement for residential
development and therefore is not a "project" for the purposes of review pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed Application SPE 02-01 at a duly noticed
public hearing on April 4, 2002, and voted to forward the request to the City Council with a
recommendation of approval of Application SPE 02-01; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed Application SPE 02-01 and all documents relating
thereto and took oral and written testimony at its duly noticed public hearing of April 15, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which
constitute the record of proceedings upon which this approval is based is the office of the City
Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED TIIAT
A. The City Council makes the following findings based on the substantial evidence in
the record, including the attached Staff Report, that Application SPE 02-01 is consistent with each
of the three elements set forth in Zoning Ordinance section 50.62(b )(1) as follows:
(1) The water system, sewer system and street system are located at the Project's
UH\550797.1
01-042304706002
-1-
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-27
boundaries;
(2) The Project will create 11 single family lots that cannot be further subdivided; and
(3) The parcel was created prior to October 4, 2001.
B. The request for a Small Project Exemption from the RDO, Application SPE 02-01,
to allow construction of up to 11 single-family housing units is hereby approved subject to the four
(4) conditions in the attached Staff Report.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 2002, by the following
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ARELLANO, DILLON, GARTMAN,
MORALES, PINHEIRO, VELASCO, and
SPRINGER
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
NONE
APPROVED:
- ,~5jJ~'i~<
Thomas W. Springer, May
A;tt:; /)
c-; "" ,,{;lc;:,u -< ~,
Rhonda Pellin, City Clerk
UH\550797.1
01-042304706002
-2-
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-27
Exhibit A
Community Development Department
Planning Division (408) 846-0440
Small Project Exemption
March 22, 2002
Revised April 8, 2002
HLE NUMBER:
SPE 02-01
APPLlCANT:
Mark Hewell (c/o MH Engineering) (408) 779-7381
LOCATION:
West side of Church Street north of Chappel Court and across from Woodworth Way
STAFF:
Cydney Casper (ccasoer@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
REQUESTED ACTION:
Small Project Exemption request for I I single family residences.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
Parcel Numbers:
Land Area:
Flood Zone: "X"
790-16-061
1. 9 acres
Panel # 060340 0002 D Date: 8-17-98
STATUS OF PROPERTY:
Existing Land Use
General Plan Designation
Zoning
Vacant land
Low Density Residential
AI
STATUS OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
Existing Land Use
General Plan Designation
Zoning
North: Water District Channel
East: Single Family Residences
South: Single Family Residences
West: Vacant Land
Park/Public Facility
Low Density Residential
Low & Medium Density Residential
Low Density Residential
PF
R1
R11R3
A1
SPE 02-01
2
03/22/02
Revised 4/8/02
CONFORMANCE OF REQUEST WITH GENERAL PLAN:
The proposed project confonns to the land use designation for the property on the General Plan map, and
is consistent with the intent of the text of the General Plan Document. This project also confonns with
the policies of Gilroy's General Plan. The following examples demonstrate this compliance:
Urban Development and Communitv Design (Section II):
Policy 3: "Urban Development will only occur within the incorporated portion of the Planning
Area. Land will therefore be annexed to the City before final development approval
is given. "
Policy 4: "The City will phase development in an orderly, contiguous manner in order 10
maintain a compact development pal/ern to avoid premature investment for the
extension of public facilities and services. New urban development will occur in areas
where municipal services are available and capacity exists prior to the approval of
development in areas which would require major new facility expansion.
The proposed project is in conformance with these policies, because this property is already located within
the incorporated City limits and because municipal services are currently available near this site.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides a
categorical exemption that applies to this request: Class 32, Section 15332; "1n-Fill Development
Projects ".
ANALYSIS OF REQUEST:
Issues & Concerns:
If approved for Small Project Exemption, for 11 units, allocation as per Section 50.62 of the Zoning Ordinance,
the following shall be addressed prior to project build-out:
~ The configuration of the private driveways and use of turf block in front of Lots 8 and 9 must be resolved
before tentative map approval.
~ The drainage swale on lots 7, 8 and 9 must be addressed to meet City Standards prior to any tentative map
approval.
Proiect Stremlths:
The following characteristics of this project were considered to be strengths when evaluating this application:
1& The proposed project site is considered predominantly an "infill" development.
1& The proposed request is consistent with the intent of the goals and policies of the City's General Plan
document.
SPE 02-01
3
03/22/02
Revised 4/8/02
Prior To Development, The Applicant Will Be Required to:
#1. Rezone the property from AI to RI consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation
#2. Complete a Tentative Map to subdivide the property.
#3. Concurrently obtain Architecture and Site Planned Unit Development Review approval
CRITERlA (per Section 50.62, attached):
# I. The water system, sewer system, and street system must be adjacent to the property boundary;
Finding - Consistent: The water system, sewer system, and street system are located at this
property's houndaries.
#2. No project that requires more than twelve units to completely build-out the property is eligible for
this exemption. It is specifically the intention of this requirement to eliminate the possibility of
further development on the property through further division or zoned density absorption.
Finding - Consistent: The project will create 11 single-family lots that cannot be further
su bdivided.
#3. Existing parcels ofland that are larger than the square footage required to develop under this
exemption and which are divided into smaller parcels after October 4,2001, shall not be allocated
units under this exemption even if the new parcels otherwise meet the criteria. This requirement
is intended to preclude the possibility of a large parcel being divided to qualifY for tbe Small Project
Exemption.
Finding - Consistent: The parcel was created prior to October 4, 2001.
RECOMMENDA TlON
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval of this Small
Project Exemption request to the City Council. Staff further recommends that the following 4 conditions
be applied to the project:
I. An RDO Performance Agreement must be completed prior to the completion of any Final Map.
2. The applicant shall meet the following conditions subject to the review and approval of the Planning
Division (408) 846-0440:
a. The applicant shall obtain an approved Zone Change application prior to
approval of any Tentative Map.
SPE 02-01
4
03/22/02
Revised 4/8/02
b. The applicant shall obtain an approved Tentative Map application and
accompanying Architectural and Site Review (Planned Unit Development)
approval prior to the issuance of any building permits.
c. The applicant shall provide additional amenities to the project as required
under Section 50.55 of the Zoning Ordinance for Planned Unit Developments.
3. The applicant shall meet the following conditions subject to the review and approval of
the Deputy Fire Marshal (408) 846-0430:
a. Provide another alternative for access through the project. Turf block is not an acceptable
option.
4. The applicant shall meet the following conditions subject to the review and approval of the
Engineering Division (408) 846-0450:
a. Show the following on the future Tentative Map application submittal:
* Tract number and name, or designation.
* Sufficient legal description of the land as to define the boundaries of the proposed tract.
* Approximate radii of all curves
* Direction of flow of all watercourses and natural drainage channels
b. Improvement plans are required.
c. Sidewalks are required along all lot frontages, including the private driveway
d. Remove the handicap ramp from the knuckle.
e. A ten-foot public utilities easement is required behind all public right-ol-way.
f The private driveway is a separate lot and also requires a homeowner association for
maintenance.
g. Provide fire hydrants along the private drive.
h. Loop the water line to Church Street.
I. The turf block section is not acceptable.
SPE 02-0]
5
03/22/02
Revised 4/8/02
On April 4, 2002, the Planning Commission voted 6-0-1 (Commissioner Correa absent) to forward
a recommendation of appro va] to the City Council.
am Faus
Planning Division Manager
bfaus@ci.gilroy.ca.us
.
.
SPE 02-01 Hewell
>--:-. .\". /, \
~. '>..
. ' :\~
\
<;\
/
/
~.'
.~
..~
. I I_II )l'
\: -...; r Oi!"
j,I..r,)n,I.I!li
G'~;, '.SI] .-1 :PF
I.I~I. , ..;,~
j "RI
t'n"~itl
=
.
.
SPE 02-01 Hewell
N
SCALf . 229:
i--- I-- 1--.
200 0
200
FEET
400
600
A
http://128.1.2.234/gilroy3/mapslGilroy.mwf
Thursday, March 21. 2002 12:25 PM
I, RHONDA PELLIN, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certity that the attached
Resolution No. 2002-27 is an original resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of
Gilroy at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 6th day of May, 2002, at which meeting a
quorum was present.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of
the City of Gilroy this 10th day of May, 2002.
~~~.
City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
(Seal)