Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1993/09/21 ~I declare under penalty of perjury that I am em~'oyed by the City of Chura Vista in the Of.flce of the City Clerk and that I posted thJS Age~da/Notice on the Bulletin Board at . Tuesday, September 21, 1993 the Public S rvi es BUildin'''' and at Cit H II CouncIl Chambers 6:00 p.m. OATED~ <7. ,/r; ~ SIGNED ~;~~~UbliC Services Building Regular Meetin~ of the City of Chula ista Cityouncil CAU. TO ORDER Councilmembers Fox _' Horton -' Moore _' Rindone _' and Mayor Nader _ 1. ROLL CALL: 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 7, 1993 and September 14, 1993. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: None submitted. CONSEN[ CALENDAR (Items 5 through 12) The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the Council by one motion without discussion unless a CounciJmember, a member of the public or City staff requests that the item be pu1led for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recom.mendLltion.) Items pu1led from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter petitioning Council to pass an ordinance prohibiting the distribution of handbills - Betty Chou, Member, Chula Vista Motel Association, Chula Vista Travelodge, 394 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA 91910. The item is being referred to the City Attorney for consideration and recommendation. 6. ORDINANCE 2568 7. ORDINANCE 2569 AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 1993, AS AMENDED, BY MODIFYING THE TERMS OF THE LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. FRANCI-llSE TO REQUIRE COLLECTION OF YARD WASTE FROM RESIDENCES WITHIN THE CIlY, FOR PURPOSES OF RECYCIJNG (second readin~ and adoption) At the 8/17/93 meeting, Council approved the resolution giving notice of intent to grant a franchise for residential yard waste recycling program collection services to be provided by Laidlaw Waste Systems and setting 917/93 as the date for the public hearing. As directed, staff noticed the public hearing in conformance with the Charter. The report further describes the Yard Waste Recycling Program as conceptually approved by Council, to allow for Council and citizen input during the public hearing. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Administration) ADDING CHAPTER 8.23 ENTITLED "WASTE MANAGEMENf FRANCI-llSE" TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE (second readin~ and adoption) - The ordinance Agenda -2- September 21, 1993 8. RESOLUTION 17253 ADOPTING COUNCIL POUCY NUMBER 900-01 ENTITI.ED "DELEGATION OF AUlHORITY TO RELEASE PROPERTY FROM AND CONSENT TO TRANSFER OR ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHfS UNDER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTSw - The purpose of the report is to streamline certain transactional transfers related to existing development agreements. The action related to the establishment of a Council policy will clarify and simplify administration of development agreements. Staff recommends item be continued for one week to the meetin~ of 9/28/93. (Deputy City Manager Krempl) 9. RESOLUTION 17254 ACCEPTING CAUFORNIASTATE UBRARYSERVICES ACT, FAMIUES FOR UTERACY GRANT FUNDS AWARDED TO TI-IE UTERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AMENDING TI-IE FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 BUDGET TO INCLUDE .78 FULL TIME EQUNALENT POSITION - The Literacy Team has been awarded a $23,000 California Library Services Act Families For Literacy grant from the California State Library to develop and offer special family literacy services to adult learners and their young children. The funds cannot be used to supplant the current tutor reading program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director) 4/5th's vote required. 10. RESOLUTION 17255 ACCEPTING FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, UBRARYSERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACT, TITLE VI UBRARY UTERACY PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS AWARDED TO TI-IE UTERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AMENDING TI-IE FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 BUDGET TO INCLUDE A .36 FULL TIME EQUNALENT POSITION - The Literacy Team has received $34,845 in funding under the Library Services and Construction Act, Title VI Library Literacy Program to renew their Model Writing Programs and Adult Learners in Federal fiscal year 1993/94. The funds cannot be used to supplant the current tutor reading program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director) 4/5th's vote required. 11. RESOLUTION 17256 WAIVING IMMATERIAL DEFECT, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR TI-IE CONSTRUCTION OF TI-IE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EXPANSION IN TI-IE CITY - On 9/1/93, six bids were received for the construction of the City Attorney's Office Expansion. Of the six bids, the bid from the Augustine Company was found to be the lowest bid. Staff recommends approval of the resolution awarding the contract to Augustine Company in the amount of $100,417. (Director of Public Works) 12. RESOLUTION 17257 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR ~URFAClNG OF LOMA VERDE SWIMMING POOL WIlli FIBERGLASS IN TI-IE CITY (PR- 145)W - On 7/28/93, sealed bids were received for "Resurfacing of Lorna Verde Swimming Pool with Fiberglass in the City (PR-145)", The work to be done includes furnishing and installing all materials and providing all necessary labor to complete resurfacing of the Lorna Verde Swimming Pool with a new fiberglass surface. Associated with the new surface is the installation of some new tile work and lane lines, and the replacement of pool and deck hardware. Staff recommends approval of the resolution awarding the contract to Derek Downey Pool and Spa in the amount of $48,950 and authorizing the expenditure of $13,889 for the additive bid item. (Director of Public Works) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * Agenda -3- September 21, 1993 PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLl.mONS AND ORDINANCES The foHowing items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak to any item, please fill out the -Request to Speak Form- available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. None submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Cou.ndI on any subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City Cou.ndI from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow -Request to Speak Under Oral Col1J11lUnications Form- available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action.. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees. None submitted. ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the Council, staff, or members of the general public.. The items will be considered individually by the Council and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the al1emative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out a -Request to Spe~ form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public comments are limited to five minutes. 13. RESOLl.mON 17258 AMENDING TIlE DOWNfOWN PARKING PERMIT POUCY TO ALLOW RESIDENTS TO PURCHASE PARKING PERMITS - On 8/6/93, a petition, with one hundred signatures, from the residents of the Congregational Tower at 288 "F" Street, was submitted to the City requesting that the City reconsider placing parking meters in the parking lot at the comer of Church Avenue and Center Street. Agency staff met with the managers of the Congregational Tower and discussed their current parking accommodations and the issue was presented to the Town Centre Project Area Committee. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) 14. REPORT UPDATE ON REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR SOUD WASTE DISPOSAL OPTIONS - An oral update report will be given by staff. Agenda -4- September 21, 1993 ITEMS PUllED FROM TI-IE CONSENT CALENDAR This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Cou.ncilmembers. Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual OTI-IER. BUSINESS 15. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORT(S) a. Scheduling of meetings. 16. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a. Ratification of appointment: Safety Commission - Scott Bierd; Safety Commission - Robert A. Smith. b. Sponsorship of seminar/tour to promote Chula Vista merchants' opportunities in Mexico. Continued from the meeting of 9/14/93. c. Designation of second alternate to Interim Solid Waste Commission. d. Selection of voting delegates for the League of Cities. e. Support for legislation to amend the State Welfare and Institutional Code to require juvenile courts to inform school officials of all crimes committed by minors in attendance at their schools. f. Support for City of Imperial Beach and County of San Diego State of Emergency to deal with Tijuana sewage. 17. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Moore a. Council action as to source of funding 40 to 45 member contingent from Sister City, Odawara, Japan on 10/29/93 and 10/30/93. Councilman Fox b. Navy Remediation Action Contract - Border Environmental Commerce Zone (BECZ) participation. c. Status of permits for Central Medical Plaza and discussion of methods to streamline the process. Agenda -5- September 21, 1993 ADJOURNMENT The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss: Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 - Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA), Western Council of Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA), International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented. Continued from the meeting of 9/14/93. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. Jaginco, et al (Borst) - authority to execute settlement agreement in road widening condemnation case. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.7 - Approval of evaluation form for appointed officials. Continued from the meeting of 9/14/93. Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Igou vs. the City of Chula Vista. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. County of San Diego regarding booking fees. The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a Joint Meeting of the City Council/County Board of Supervisors on Monday, September 27, 1993 at 3:00 p.m. at the County Administration Center, and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on September 28, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council meeting. September 16, 1993 SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and Cit[unCil John D. Goss, City Manager' City Council Meeting of Sep ember 21, 1993 TO: FROM: This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of Tuesday, September 21, 1993. Comments regarding the Written Communications are as follows: I 5a. This is a letter from the Chula Vista Motel Association requesting the Council to adopt an ordinance prohibiting the distribution of handbills. THE CITY ATTORNEY IS REVIEWING THIS REQUEST FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL. JDG:mab RECEIVED -8 Dear 7J1aA/r / '7J1Y'. ~I.e-v/ "93 . -8 P 3 :31 The Hotels and Motels in the~'f~~~RUe~~r-~'.Vista have joined together to form the Chula VlD ~C ~3 p~ciation. As an association we meet on a montn y asis 0 invite guest speakers, plan projects to promote our industry, and discuss problems that concern all of us. One problem that we all have is companies or individuals who make pizzas come on our properties and slide advertisements through our guest room doors. The purpose of this letter is to petition the Chula Vista city Council to pass a city ordinance that can be used to stop this unwanted intrusion on our properties. The following is a list of reasons why we feel this is a important and valid request for this city ordinance. 1. This is a liability concern for us. As these advertisements are pushed into our rooms they fall on the floor where a guest could easily slip unaware of a loose paper flyer that is normally not found on the floor of a hotel guest room. 2. We have contacted the police department about these unwanted trespassers. They have told us there is really nothing they can do to help us, as there is no law to enforce at this time 3. The city of Anaheim California passed an ordinance to solve this problem for the hotels in that area. The ordinance number is AMC section code 7.24.040 distribution of hand bills prohibited. Other cities are seeing this problem that hotels are having and are begining to help in this way. 4. When these people arrive on our properties they drop off three to four people who run around to all our guest rooms doors alarming our guests as to who would be at there door, and have even tried to get into guest rooms. 5. When asked to leave by motel employees they usually comply only to return later that day or the next, knowing they are not wanted and that there is really nothing we can do. They have made threats, used abusive language and made obscene hand gestures when they were asked to get off our properties. , '~ .) ~~ ('I)WRmEN COMMUNICATIONS cc.,~~~~ s;,..,) ~ '1j?-;j/J 6. It is our concern that most of these companies do not have a business licences so they are not inspected by the health department. Only phone numbers are left and they only deliver and refuse to give address of company, is the pizza our guests are buying safe to eat? 1. These pamphlets are very unsightly and have attributed to a daily litter problem. We are having to pick up these pamphlets that were left in our rooms and parking lots in order to keep our properties clean, comfortable and safe for our guests. These are a few of the reasons we have for bring this petition before you. Since our properties reflect an image of the city we need the City Councils help in solving this unsightly and potentially dangerous situation. We would be enthusiastic to meet with the City Council to discuss this matter in more detail. We will be anxiously waiting for a reply from you about a time and date when we will attend a City Council meeting. Sincerely, ~1[~~r- .3 9t./ B/zA}-e'd(.;v'~ Chd&7< (/~,. !~ 9191D b/'1- 4.;;< t;' -- ~0 O() ~-'~ AGENDA PACKET SCANNED AT FIRST ORDINANCE READING ON: 9-1 +- 93 ~ r\\O AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VIST ~~ENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1993, AS AMENDED, BY ~DIFYING THE TERMS OF THE LAIDLAW WASTE SYSr~, INC'. FRANCHISE TO REQUIRE COLLECTION OF ~Apq5i1fASTE FROM SINGLE- FAMILY AND SPECIFIED MUJ~~IL Y RESIDENCES WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ~ THE PURPOSE OF RECYCLING. ORDINANCE NO. .25'1, 8'" The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: 'SECTION I: That Section 8.23.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended to add the following subsection: Sec. 8.23.010 Definitions. " FF. "Salvaging or Salvageable" means the controlled and/or authorized storage and removal of Solid Waste, Designated Recyclables or recoverable materials." SECTION II: That Section 8.23.230 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Cbse to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.230 Residential Yard Waste Recvclina Services Grantee shall provide Yard Waste Recycling services to all Single- family Residences and those Multi-family dwellings not serviced by Curbside Collection or by landscapers who haul yard waste from the Multi-family dwelling ("Specified Multi-Family"), on the following terms and conditions: A. . Exclusivitv - The City grants to Grantee, for the term herein specified and subject to such terminations herein allowed, the exclusive right to collect Yard Waste, deposited in Designated Yard Waste Recycling Containers (or alternatively, "Containers") and/or bundles located at Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location(s) as may be identified for Single-family households and by Specified Multi-family dwellings. This grant of exclusive license is not intended and does not preclude duly licensed landscape contractors, non-profit organizations and community groups from conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds, nor does it preclude a person from selling or otherwise disposing of their own Yard Waste through a landscape contractor, self-haul or composting, so long as said collection, donation or sale does not occur at the Designated 1 ~-/ Recycling Collection or Storage Location. However, once the Yard Waste has been placed in the Designated Recycling Containers or at a Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location, the material ("Franchised Recyclables") becomes one of the subject matters of this grant of franchise. The Grantee agrees to cooperate with the City in reaching a modification to this ction to the extent required by law at anytime it should deemed necessary in the future. B. Obligations of Grantee 1. Imolementation Schedule - Grante shall commence and diligently implement this franchise City Cie from the date of this franchise so that all single-family resi nces and Specified Multi- Family residential complexes in e City have Yard Waste Recycling Collection service by De ember 1, 1993. 2. Collection - Grantee shall f nish said labor, services, mater- ials and equipment required perform this franchise. Grantee shall provide Collection and emoval services for all Yard Waste which is placed in Designa d Recycling Containers or in bundles, at Designated Recyclin Collection or Storage Locations, as defined by the City of C ula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.25, segregated from Ref e, from all Single-family and Specified Multi-Family residen s. Grantee shall offer collection of Yard Waste not less tha once per week and provide any additional Collection as shal be necessary to prevent overflow of the Exterior Recycling ontainers at specified Multi-family Residences. Collection will be n regularly scheduled Refuse Collection days or as negotiated th the City for Single-family residences and as shall b~ arran d with the building property owner, manager or designated a nt thereof for Specified Multi-family complexes. The Grantee nd the City will mutually agree to any changes in Collection s hedule frequencies or Removal Frequency. Design 0 Collection vehicles shall be done to limit the contami tion and maximize the salvageable value of the collected Yard W te. Any and all changes to the established means of Collect' n of Franchised Residential Recyclables, as herein outlin , shall be notified to the City in advance. ~ -, Acc table materials fQr collection include all Yard Waste as her n defined, excluding palm fronds, treated or processed wood or lumber, Bulky Waste or any other materials as shall be determined by the City as to not be Salvageable. All acceptable Yard Waste shall be void of nails, wire, rocks, dirt or any other -. 2 ~ b-tz." COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT " Item ~ !/2J/ry Meeting Da~ ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing for the Consideration of Granting a Franchise to Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. for Residential Yard Waste Recycling Collection Services. REVIEWED BY: Ordinance No. 2.~~'6 Amending Ordina~~No. 1993, As Amended, By Modifying the Terms of .1..h"qQld)aw Waste Systems, Inc. Franchise to Require ~~~I:~~ ~l\Vard Waste from Residences within the City of Chula V~r Purposes of Recycling. ~GcO~'O -;7 / Principal Manage~t Assistant SnydeQJ Conservation Coordinator ( City Manager JGjl(j j~) 1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No_XJ Referral #2721 SUBMITTED BY: At the August 17th meeting, Council approved the resolution giving notice of intent to grant a franchise for residential yard waste recycling program collection services to be provided by Laidlaw Waste Systems and setting September 7th, 1993 as the date for the public hearing. As directed, staff noticed the public hearing in conformance with the Charter-required process for granting a franchise. At the September 7h meeting, the public hearing was opened and continued to this date. This report further describes the Yard Waste Recycling Program as previously conceptually approved by Council, to help focus Council and citizen input during the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the ordinance and place it on first reading. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission discussed the draft franchise ordinance at their July 26, 1993 meeting and approved a motion (4-0-3) supporting staff's recommendation provided that one member's comments tre provided to Council. These comments were addressed in the August 17h Council report, and minutes of that meeting were attached to that report. As reported at that time, staff believes that these concerns are appropriately addressed by the very nature of the proposed "options" Yard Waste Program. DISCUSSION At the June 22nd meeting, Council approved in concept a proposed Yard Waste Recycling Program with collection services to be provided by Laidlaw Waste Systems. On August 17th, Council approved the notice of intent to grant a franchise to allow for full ~ (P-l Page 2, ItemA (.p Meeting Date 9/14/93 -. implementation of yard waste recycling in the City. The franchise ordinance, as proposed with certain amendments requested by Council at the August 17th meeting, is contained in Attachment A. The specific amendments requested by Council, as well as other concerns raised by Council at the August 17th meeting, are discussed in detail further on in this report. Summary of the Pro Dosed Residential Yard Waste Recycling Program Franchise Why Yard Waste Recycling Now? - Landfill space is declining throughout the country, with San Diego's regional landfill space being no exception. As landfill space declines and the search for new landfills mounts, costs inevitably rise. The California Integrated Waste Management Act (AS 939) requires cities and counties to reduce waste 25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent 2000. With 17 percent of Chula Vista's waste stream comprised of yard waste, implementing a yard waste recycling program will greatly assist the City in meeting these goals and conserving the region's landfill capacity. Additionally, as Council is aware, the County of San Diego implemented a mandatory recycling ordinance. Under the County's ordinance, yard waste recycling was to have been implemented in the South Bay last January. However, to allow the City time to develop a program to best meet the needs of its residents, the County has provided the City with a temporary exemption from enforcement of the ordinance. -.,. Yard Waste Recvcling Program aotions - Through providing residents with options for yard waste program participation, the City is taking an important step toward having residents participate more directly in the solid waste decision-making process. Residents are being allowed the opportunity to reduce yard waste through composting and mulching and to participate in the program through the option that best suits their needs. Summary of optional service levels: 1. If Resident is Not Using System No Charge 2. Subscription Services, Monthly Fee with Container Rental a. For Laidlaw Container Rental b. For Weekly Collection Services Total Monthly Fee for Services With Rental $1.00 2.00 $3.00 3. Subscription Services, Monthly Fee with Purchase of Container a. For Weekly Collection Services b. One-Time Laidlaw Container Purchase Price $2.00 $ 5 5.00 -, 4. "Pay-As-You-Go" Services, Sticker Purchases (5 cans or bundles per Sticker) $1.00 IIJ 7_/-"""''' -, r r \g -~ Page 3. Item.J!i! Meeting Date 9/14/93 Detail of optional service levels: SubscriDtion Services: Under this option, a resident would pay a monthly fee of either $2 or $3 per month for weekly collection of one 55-gallon cart on wheels. The $3.00 fee would allow residents to place yard waste in a rented Laidlaw container at the curb once per week, with no additional costs for the service ($1 per month for the container rental and $2 per month for the collection charges). Residents would also have the option to purchase a container for a charge of $55 per container. Residents who purchase the Laidlaw container would then pay $2.00 per month for weekly collection services. In addition to the container, residents may place up to six bundles out for collection each week. "Pav As You Go ": Under this option, residents would purchase stickers at $1.00 per sticker which would allow for the pick-up of up to five cans or bundles per collection (per sticker) . Sticker design As per Council request, staff met with Laidlaw to discuss the design of the sticker in order to ensure that the sticker could not be stolen and reused. The least costly way to design an effective sticker would be to have one part of the sticker slightly perforated for removal (by the Laidlaw collector) with relatively little a.dhesive on it; the other part would have significantly more adhesive so that it would strongly adhere to the container. Anyone trying to remove the sticker from the collection container would inevitably tear the sticker and make it useless. The sticker would appear something like this: ~ The bottom half of the diamond would have little adhesive on it, as would the center strip running down the top half of the diamond. The area to the right and left of the center strip (shaded area in diagram) in the top portion of the diamond would remain on the container once the bottom portion has been removed (it can however be removed by the resident as desired). This sticker design will not prevent vandalism, but this would be nearly impossible to eliminate. Residents will be encouraged to save their receipt of purchase for the stickers in order to receive pick-up should their sticker be vandalized. Laidlaw will allow one or two pick- ups if a resident calls stating that their sticker has been vandalized, before requiring proof of purchase, in order not to inconvenience residents. However, should a resident ~ f.I-2J Page 4. ,temKU Meeting Date 9/14/93 -" repeatedly report that their sticker has been vandalized, the situation would be investigated. Backvard composting, self-haul, landscaDer: Residents would have the option to purchase a compost bin from Laidlaw at the bulk rate and a reasonable handling charge. The cost of the container is planned at $55 and similar bins retail for $100-140. As part of the informational materials to be distributed through the Yard Waste Recycling Program, residents will receive information about back yard composting, the purchase price of a compost bin, as well as information on how to obtain the City's composting manual. Residents can also have the option of taking all or a portion of their green materials to a composting site or to the County's mulching site at the Otay landfill. Residents that already have their green waste hauled by a landscaper will have the option of having the landscaper continue to haul materials, or participate in the City's collection service and have the landscaper leave the debris for collection at the curb. Regulating Backvard Comoosting As requested by Council, staff has investigated the Chula Vista Municipal Code governing the placement of compost bins. Staff believes that Chapter 8.25 (Sections 8.25.40 and 8.25.90 that apply are included as Attachment B) properly govern composting, without over-regulating residents. As with refuse bins, storage of cars and other items in yards, animals and a host of other potential "nuisances," composting must be conducted in such a manner as to not adversely impact one's neighbors. If a resident has a complaint about any problem, whether it is a neighbor's composting bin or an unsightly yard, the City's Code Enforcement Officers will investigate the matter. Currently, there are a significant number of Chula Vistans that compost with no known complaints to date. - The City's specific composting regulations are designed to eliminate the possibility of commercial composting operations in residential neighborhoods (without permits), fire danger and nuisance through odor and visual problems associated with larger, mismanaged compost piles. While the current code does not address the placement of bins as pertaining to lot lines, staff does not currently feel that such regulation is necessary. Many homes have lot lines that border a street or areas that are not utilized by neighbors (open fields, parks, large backyards, etc.). Upon discussion of this concern with the City Attorney (who has a compost bin located at the edge of his lot line), it seems that requiring res'idents to place a compost bin a certain distance from a lot line could place undue burden on many residents. Thus, staff would recommend that no new composting regulations be added at this time and that composting be monitored for nuisance complaints. Should complaints begin to occur, staff can at that time again investigate possible solutions and amendments to the Chula Vista Municipal Code. - ~~-'L( Page 5, Item~ltI Meeting Date 9/14/93 Multi-familv Comolexes - Approximately 20 percent of Chula Vista's multi-family complexes do not receive landscaper services. Additionally, some that have these services allow the landscaper to dispose of the debris in refuse bins. Complexes that do not wish to have landscapers haul away yard waste can utilize the Yard Waste Program subscription option ($3 per month for weekly collection of one-65 gallon container). As City and Laidlaw staff move to implement multi-family recycling over the next three months, all complex owners and/or managers will be notified of the mandatory yard waste diversion requirements and the Program option. Program Costs Detailed - The cost of the yard waste program has been derived using the same formula used for both the single-family and multi-family recycling programs, where program participants get the benefit of a credit for the amount of yard waste ("recyclables") not going to the landfill for disposal. The proposed Program fees are based upon the current County system-wide tipping fee of $25 per ton for yard waste and $43 per ton for refuse. Should these fees change, the Yard Waste Recycling Program costs may need to be reviewed. Regardless, these Program costs will be analyzed and brought back to Council in April 1994 under the terms of the proposed ordinance. The Yard Waste Recycling Program cost breakdown is in the following chart. I! Program Costs Per Sticker Monthly Subscription Fee . -.... ,.. ~ -r GIal cost of operations, $1.2711 $2.6611 includes franchise fee of .08 .16 Processing cost at $25/ton' .38 .92 Diversion credit at $43/ton <.65> < 1.58 > I Total cost to resident I $1.00 I $2.00 I Staff has also included a rate survey conducted for all cities, as Attachment C. Rates around the County range from $12.65 to $20.16 for refuse, yard waste and recycling services combined~/. The average rate for yard waste in cities that have established programs is $2.01 per month ("universal rate" for paid by all residents). Currently, Chula Vista's combined refuse and recycling rate is $14.33. Thus, if a resident chooses the 1. . This charge is based on an estimated 30 pounds set out weight per sticker, with an estimated 25 percent of the eligible single-family residents participating in the "pay as you go" option. 2. This charge is based upon an estimated 17 pounds per weekly set out, with an estimated 50 percent of the eligible single-family residents participating. 3. Please note that some cities have not yet increased their refuse rates to reflect the County's increased tipping fee (effective August 1). ~(q< Page 6, Item~ Meeting Date 9/14/93 --.. proposed "pay as you go" yard waste service option once per month, the combined services would cost $15.33 per month or if a resident subscribes for weekly collection the cost would be $17.33 per month (including container rental) or $16.33 per month (with purchase of the container). Collection - As staff has previously noted, with Council's endorsement, Laidlaw will be piloting a vehicle that will allow for the co-collection of yard waste and refuse (one compartment for yard waste, the other for trash). It is hoped that the vehicle proves to be practical and cost effective, in order to limit the number of collection vehicles on the street and to allow for better yard waste program efficiencies. Containers - Residents that subscribe to weekly yard waste collection services will be offered a container on wheels (approximately 65 gallons in size) for rent or purchase. To keep administrative costs down, residents will be provided the opportunity to purchase a container two times per year. All residents will be notified at the beginning of the program and on a yearly basis thereafter of the price for purchase of the container. Containers will be sold directly by Laidlaw. The cost is estimated at $55 for the container, to include a reasonable handling charge. Residents would make two equal payments through their quarterly refuse/recycling bill in order to payoff the full cost of the container. Residents that do not wish to purchase the container outright can rent the container for $1.00 per month (included in the $3 monthly subscription fee). Rental of the container includes any replacement parts and labor or replacement of entire container at no charge. Residents purchasing the container will not receive replacement parts. -. The Amortization Question Staff believes that the Laidlaw cart rental and purchase arrangement is manageable for most residents who will be high generators of yard waste (and thus likely to choose the subscription option). Residents can also provide their own container and not rent or purchase the Laidlaw container. Council has requested that staff investigate the possibility of amortizing the containers over a longer period. At this stage of the program, amortization is not practical or cost efficient. However, staff believes that the proposed two payment plan meets with the spirit of the Council request. If the containers were to be amortized at the $1 per month rental rate, it would take minimally four years to pay-off the cart. Alternatively, even if residents were allowed to make payments on the cart over a year or two year period, there are still a variety of variables that could impact the reimbursement to Laidlaw and thus potentially impact the overall costs of the Yard Waste Recycling Program. Laidlaw must purchase the bulk of the containers at one time in order to keep costs low. This is a large "up-front" cost for Laidlaw. By splitting the purchase cost in half, residents would make two equal payments of approximately $25-30 in two quarterly payments. Thus, Laidlaw would not receive reimbursement for a total of six months. _. ~ lP-<L Page 7, Itemd!!-(P Meeting Date 9/14/93 Bringing in the variable of people leaving the area without paying their bills, Laidlaw would likely lose some of the "up front" capital investment. If this cost is spread out over three or more quarterly payments, Laidlaw could stand to lose substantially more. Additionally, because the Program will be phased in over several months and because the life of the container varies depending on individual use and care, the administrative costs involved in tracking the resident purchases of the container through monthly payments could be substantial. If a resident's container is broken or stolen within a year of the purchase of it, but the container has not been paid for, it will be difficult to ensure that the resident still pays for the container. Additionally, staff feels that this unique Yard Waste Recycling Program will be rather cumbersome to implement in the first place. If Laidlaw is required to monitor payments for containers or amortization rates, this will add yet another layer of administration. In summary, higher costs for administrative handling, tracking and "bad debts" would ultimately translate into higher rates. Thus, in order to keep costs down, staff recommends that the best interests of the -esidents will be served by allowing for the option to purchase the container outright, in \/0 equal quarterly payments. If there are problems actually encountered with the container purchases, the issue can be revisited at the time of the annual Program review. Those residents who choose the "pay as you go" option will provide their own "refuse" can-like container (up to 35 gallons in size). As previously discussed, in order to keep labor and program costs down, paper or plastic bags will not be acceptable in the program, as these materials do not readily grind or compost. Properly bundled materials will be collected similarly to cans under the "pay as you go" option; residents that subscribe for weekly collection can place up to six bundles out with their container for no additional cost. Processing and Marketing - As with any "new" product, marketing is required; mulch and compost are no exception. For decades, America has relied on artificial fertilizers made from petrochemicals, while millions of tons of yard and landscape debris have filled our landfills. Through proper market development, mulch and compost can be promoted as a soil amendment to replace artificial fertilizers at a lower cost, without the environmental damage caused by petrochemical fertilizers, while helping to keep landfill costs down. The market does not currently provide enough revenues to cover the costs of collection and processing of yard waste. However, as markets develop for the material, these collection and processing costs will be off-set by the sale of the compost or mulch. Currently residents pay $1.10 per month for curbside recycling in order to cover the collection and processing costs of recyclables. There is little difference with yard waste, other than markets are less developed. Moreover, as with recycling of newspaper, bottles and cans, recycling of yard waste is still a lot less expensive than landfilling these materials and brings in far more benefits through resource savings. j!bq It,-1 Page 8, Item1~ Meeting Date 9/14/93 -, Currently, the County mulches all yard waste brought to its Clean Green Program. This mulch is either sold as biofuel, used as daily landfill cover (a very limited use) or given away to residents or businesses. Selling the mulch as biofuel generates a small amount of money, while using the mulch as landfill cover receives no revenues. The costs of the Yard Waste Program reflect only the costs associated with collection and processing, there are no costs and little revenues associated with the use (or "disposal") of the finished product. As Council is aware, the Organic Recycling West facility is expected to open in the South Bay this fall. This facility's tipping fee is expected to be the same or lower than the current County Green Waste tipping fee ($25), and will allow the City to "count" the yard waste diversion under the AB 939 requirements.1/. Organic Recycling Inc. has a nationwide reputation for successful compost facilities and marketing of compost products. Program Promotion - All start-up promotional costs are included in the operational costs for the program. If, beginning in the second year, in the City's judgment, it is reasonably determined that the public education effort has not resulted in high enough Program interest, Laidlaw can increase its educational activities at the City's direction to be negotiated and added to the cost of the Program fee, not to exceed $.10 per residence per month (subscription rate, and a similar prorated amount per sticker). -" Local Manager - Laidlaw will have at a minimum, one (1), quarter-time person directly assigned to the Yard Waste Program. Franchise Fee - As approved by Council, the Yard Waste Recycling ordinance includes a franchise fee of 8 percent, with the amendment added by Council at the August 17th meeting, to change the language of the ordinance so that the franchise fee remains at a flat 8 percent, deleting reference to escalating future increases in the percentage. Term of Agreement - The term for the Yard Waste Recycling Program franchise is proposed to be until September 4, 2002. This term is subject to a two year notice of cancellation by the City without cause which cannot be tendered sooner than the end of the third year. The services remain cancelable for cause at any time. Vehicle Amortization Clause - Similar to the Multi-family Recycling Program franchise, the following clause has been added in case the City decides to go to a mixed waste processing system within the first five years of the franchise. "If during the initial period of the franchise, or any extension thereof, the City discontinues the separate collection of multi-family recyclables and reverts to a -, 4. Under AS 939, diversion of yard waste through composting or mulching counts toward diversion credits for both the 25 percent goal (by 1995) and the 50 percent goal (by 2000). However, if the yard waste is diverted as biofuel, it can only count for up to 10 percent of the year 2000 goal of 50 percent. ~ (,--6 Page 9. Item~ Meeting Date 9/14/93 Mixed Waste Processing system for commingled collection of waste and recyclables, the City agrees to allow a rate adjustment to permit the Grantee to recover the loss incurred on the sale of vehicular equipment specifically purchased to meet the Grantee's obligations under this ordinance. Such loss will be calculated by deducting the realizable market value of the equipment from the reasonably depreciated book value of the equipment at the time of the sale of equipment. " Enforcement of mandatorv recvcling ordinance - Enforcement of yard waste recycling, as required by the County's mandatory recycling ordinance, would operate similarly to our Curbside Recycling Program. If a resident's refuse container is found to have yard waste placed in it, the refuse container would be tagged by the refuse collector and the resident would receive follow-up letters and informational materials from staff, with legal enforcement a possibility for continued violations. To date this method of public outreach has worked very successfully for the Curbside Recycling Program. Under the franchise ordinance, residents (or multi-family property managers) will receive up to three warning notices should their (separated) yard waste container have trash in it. Following the third notice, they shall be notified that they are in violation of the City's mandatory recycling ordinance and that said residence is subject to the enforcement procedure in accordance with the ordinance. Issue Regarding "Illegal" sharing of stickers or carts City staff will work closely with Laidlaw staff to try to monitor residents for illegal sharing of stickers and carts. Laidlaw collectors are very much aware of their routes and in many cases will know when residents are illegally "pooling" yard debris. Also, as with scavenging, it is hoped that .honest residents will call the City should they notice other residents sharing their stickers or carts. Through promotion of the program, it will be made clear that this is illegal and simply serves to increase the program costs for all residents through cheating. Conclusion The Yard Waste Recycling Program is a unique opportunity for the City and its residents. While other cities in the region are charging all residents for yard waste collection, regardless of usage, Chula Vista has invested the extra time and effort to design a program that is tailored to meet the needs of its residents. In other cities, residents who have little or no yard waste subsidize the yard waste services for those who generate larger amounts of yard waste. ~c,4 Page 10, Item1L( Meeting Date 9/14/93 .-" While these "universal rate" programs may sometimes keep fees lower than the proposed options program, depending on the option selected by a resident, not all residents use the program and thus not everyone benefits from it. Additionally, universal rate programs do nothing to encourage yard waste reduction through composting and mulching. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs associated with the yard waste recycling program will be borne by the user at $3 per month for the Subscription Option, weekly collection (including container rental); or $2.00 per month (if resident purchases the container); or $ 1 per sticker for the "Pay as You Go" option; or no charge if no yard waste services are needed. The service charges include a 8 percent franchise fee to be paid to the City and total revenue from this program is estimated to be $4000 per year. - ~ w./ '0/ -lD (, -/0 material that is not considered Yard Waste. 3. Containers - Grantee shall purchase and distribute, or otherwise arrange for the distribution of, Designated Recycling Containers, to include the following: a. Yard Waste Recycling Container. A Container on wheels (approximately 65 gallons) to be used for the collection of Yard Waste shall be offered to each eligible Residential customer for purchase or rent. Grantee shall distribute Containers to all customers requesting use of said Containers. The type of Container to be used or changes of Container type shall be approved by the City prior to purchase and distribution. Grantee shall retain ownership of the Containers unless the customer pays in full for the Container, as specified herein. Paper (kraft) or plastic bags will not be acceptable in the program, unless negotiated between the City and the Grantee. Properly bundled materials, such as tree limbs shall be included in the Collection, as herein defined. Acceptable bundles shall be no longer than four (4) feet in length, no more than eighteen (18) inches in diameter, or no heavier than forty (40) pounds. Bundles may be tied with string or twine only; no wire, plastic or other material may be used. Residents may provide their own "refuse" can-like Container for the purpose of storing the Yard Waste for Collection. This Container must be of the type acceptable by the City for the Collection of Refuse, in accordance with City ordinances. No Container shall be more than 35 gallons in size and weigh more than fifty (50) pounds when used for Storage of Yard Waste for Collection. All Containers used for the Storage of Yard Waste shall be kept so that operational performance allows for maximum hauler Collectton efficiency. Grantee will be responsible for keeping records and making them available to the City regarding additional Containers requested, and the reason for the request, e.g., damaged, stolen, etc. b. Exterior Recycling Containers. An appropriate Yard Waste Collection and Storage Container(s) shall be provided for use at each Multi-family complex that meets the space restraints and Collection needs of the respective complex and the residents therein. Said Containers may include 90 3 ~(P-/~ gallon carts on wheels, 2 cubic yard bin or 3 cubic yard bin. Each container shall conform to the following: plastic containers should include recycled plastic content; be fire resistant; be of durable quality and warranty; be heat stamped or labeled for commodity; be clearly labeled on the lids and the front facing of the bin, in Spanish and English (with graphics) as to the Designated Recyclable(s) and "No Trash"; be clearly labeled with the Grantee's name and phone number. - c. Compost bins. The Grantee agrees to offer Compost Bins to all residents. The Grantee shall arrange for a mechanism that allows for bins to be ordered through the Grantee and sold to residents at the bulk purchasing cost (including shipping and a reasonable handling and administration charge). Compost bin types to be considered should be sturdy and proven state-of-the-art compost design. The Grantee may choose to offer residents a choice of two different models, e.g., one "open composting system" and one "closed." Bins should be composed of scrap waste wood and/or recycled plastic content. Residents shall be allowed to purchase the bins through an ordering system designed by the Grantee, with assistance from the City, that allows for wide distribution of the ordering mechanism (e.g., mail order coupons) to a majority of Chula Vista residents. The franchisee will work with the City to establish and implement the bin ordering system. .- The Grantee will work with the City to provide information to the residents on bin delivery and/or pick-up specifics, and on the use of the composting bins, once received. Bins may be dropped or shipped to a central location in the City for pick-up by residents from that site, provided residents are properly notified as to the pick-up point, or as an alternative bins may be delivered directly to residential dwellings. 4. TransDortation and Marketing of Franchised Recyclables - Grantee shall transport collected Franchised Recyclables to a central collection and Processing point and shall retain responsibility of the materials, so as to yield the highest possible Salvageable value for the Franchised Recyclables as collected and in accordance with any Processing contract held by the Grantee. No noncontaminated Franchised Recyclables shall be Landfilled, unless approved by the City. Should the collected Yard Waste be unsalvageable, only the City Manager (or designee) of the City of - 4 ~'-;r Chula Vista may decide not to collect the affected Yard Waste material. All written contracts, if any, with processors, recyclers or other brokers of Franchised Recyclables shall be submitted to the City. Franchised Recyclables that are contaminated due to the placement of Refuse in a Designated Recycling Container, or inclement weather that leaves the Franchised Recyclables unsalvageable, may be landfilled. The Grantee shall retain a record of such occurrences and report said occurrences to the City on a quarterly basis. Should contamination of Franchised Recyclables occur at a Single-family or Multi-family complex, said residence shall be notified. Should contamination occur three or more times, said residence shall be notified that they are in violation of CVMC Chapter 8.25 and that said residence in subject to penalties therein described. In order to allow for the Yard Waste Program to fully assist the City in meeting its AB 939 obligations, the City is interested in having the collected Yard Waste processed for compost or mulch (not biofuel). To this end, the City reserves the right to direct the Grantee to transport the collected materials to a duly permitted composting facility in the South Bay area, if it deems it to be in the best interest of the City. The City will negotiate with the Grantee to allow for the most equitable and beneficial processing of the collected yard waste. City staff will assist in the marketing of material to the extent practical and feasible. 5. Missed Pick-UDS - In case of missed pick-up called in by a Single-family Resident or Multi-family complex property manager, owner or designated agent thereof, Grantee shall, where possible, provide Collection within 24 hours. If unable to accommodate due to inadequate notice, the Franchised Recyclables shall be picked-up on the next scheduled collection day and Single-family Resident or Multi-family complex owner, property manager or designated agent thereof is to be notified. If the Designated Recycling Containers are overflowing or otherwise creating a Nuisance as a consequence of a missed pick-up, the Grantee is required to provide Collection within 48 hours of notification of missed pick-up. Information on missed pick-ups shall be logged by Grantee and shall be available to the City. 6. Public Awareness Program - The parties hereto agree to work diligently to formulate promotional plans and/or advertising to encourage Recycling in the City and thereby maximize the mutual benefits of this ordinance. The Grantee, in conjunction with the 5 ~ (,-tli' City, is responsible for promotion, education and outreach activities related to the program. The Grantee will prepare an -., introductory packet of information regarding the Citywide Yard Waste Recycling program and will distribute such packet to each eligible residence and Specified Multi-family complex owners, property managers or designated agent thereof. The packet shall include, but not be limited to: a) an informational notice, appropriate for hanging on refrigerator or other location indoors, that details all program elements, how residents can participate, proper placement of Yard Waste in Containers or Bundles, the City's mandatory recycling ordinance and recycling hotline phone number; and, b) a general information brochure on composting; A "pay as you go" sticker designed with a tear-off portion to allow the Yard Waste Collection driver to remove the tear-off portion once the materials are collected shall also be made available to Program participants. The Grantee, with assistance from the City, shall arrange for distribution of the stickers through at least two retail outlets, the Grantee's business location, and other locations, as necessary, to be negotiated. All promotional materials shall be developed with the City's Conservation Coordinator's or other designated City employee's advise and consultation, from the first step in development, _ through the final printing and distribution of materials. No materials shall be developed or distributed without the approval of the Conservation Coordinator or other designated City employee. All Introductory Materials shall be fully translated into Spanish, unless otherwise approved by the City. All subsequent materials shall be fully or at least partially translated into Spanish, unless otherwise approved by the City. All program materials shall utilize graphic representation of Designated Recyclables. The franchisee will be required to distribute the City's composting guide (upon resident request) and other City developed yard waste related informational materials; the City will provide copies of guides and City developed materials at no cost to the negotiated franchisee. The Grantee shall provide to the City a detailed outline of program promotional materials to be developed and outreach activities to be conducted in advance of program implementation. The Grantee will participate in community and school outreach activities during the initial phase of program implementation and provide ongoing outreach activities, to include, community events, media events, make presentations to community groups and businesses on an as needed basis and as directed by the City, and attend County-wide meetings related to recycling, speaking on the -" 6 ~~-(t, City's Yard Waste Recycling Program if needed and directed by the City. The Grantee also agrees to reasonably assist in developing incentives to increase participation and tonnage collected, and to encourage involvement of community and youth groups. All such Yard Waste Program outreach may be conducted in conjunction with the other franchised Recycling programs, upon approval by the City. The Grantee and the City agree that the main purpose of an aggressive public education program is to increase participation and diversion, as well as limiting contamination of Franchised Recyclables. Beginning in the second year, if, in the City's judgement, it is reasonably determined that the public education effort has not resulted in' high enough Program interest, the Grantee will perform reasonable public education activities at the City's direction at a cost to the Grantee to be agreed upon by the City and added to the cost of the Program fee, not to exceed $.10 per Unit per month. If needed, as part of the educational activities as determined by the City with input from the Grantee, the Grantee will develop incentives to increase participation, such as, offering rewards for program participants that have high participation levels and high tonnage levels. The Grantee agrees to work with the City to provide ongoing Program monitoring services and quality control to prevent contamination of materials and encourage participation to property managers, to include on-site visitations, as deemed necessary by the Grantee and/or the City. The Grantee will provide to the City a quarterly accounting of all outreach activities conducted during the previous quarter. The Grantee will also provide an accurate accounting of all costs associated with Program outreach, to include, but not be limited to, costs for designing of outreach materials, printing of outreach materials, etc. 7. Local Manager - The Grantee shall at all times during the term of this ordinance have a local manager charged with the responsibility for supervision of the recycling operations and obligations of the Grantee and agrees to provide, at a minimum, one (1), quarter-time person directly assigned to the Yard Waste Program, whose duties are to include: promotional material development and distribution; program monitoring (including on- site visitations); educational outreach to school children; community outreach and reporting duties. 7 .fj;-q (P - rf 8. Anti-scavenging - The Grantee agrees to provide information to all property owners, managers or designated agents there of regarding the City's anti-scavenging ordinance and how to report --.. scavenging occurrences. The Grantee agrees to inform all of its employees of the City's anti-scavenging ordinance on a regular basis and how said employees shall report scavenging occurrences. C. Obligations of the City - Subject to the provisions of Paragraph 85 of this ordinance, the City shall have lead responsibility for directing the development and expenditures of the public awareness activities for the Yard Waste Recycling Program. The City agrees to reasonably enforce all Program specifications. This includes the following: that Single-family residents and Multi- family complexes are allowed to place up to five containers (to be no more than 35 gallons in size each) and/or bundles at the Designated Collection Location per "pay-as-you-go" sticker; the City's mandatory recycling ordinance requirements as they pertain to Yard Waste and as described herein; and, Yard Waste Container specifications. If during the initial period of the franchise, or any extension thereof, the City discontinues the separate collection of multi- family recyclables and reverts to a Mixed Waste Processing - system for commingled collection of waste and recyclables, the City agrees to allow a rate adjustment to permit the Grantee to recover the loss incurred on the sale of vehicular equipment specifically purchased to meet the Grantees obligations under this ordinance. Such loss will be calculated by deducting the realizable market value of the equipment from the reasonably depreciated book value of the equipment at the time of the sale of equipment. D. Funding and Rates for Collection 1. Funding Sources - The Residential Yard Waste Recycling Program will be funded by four sources: a monthly recycling fee to all eligible residents (to be billed to the property manager or resident, as with refuse billings); Net revenues from the sale of collected Yard Waste material, at such time as the market provides revenues for Yard Waste; savings in disposal cost of material diverted from the landfill; grant funds when available and awarded. a. A monthly recycling fee, charged to eligible residents is the primary source of funding for this program. In general, it -.. 8 _'1/ JH'G-r3 will be allocated equally among the customer base, as determined by Section D.2 below, receiving said Recycling Collection services and will be determined by the Grantee's operating expenses directly attributable to the recycling program, less: any such revenue that shall be received from the sale of the collected Recyclables at such time that the market allows, the savings realized in disposal costs of material diverted from the landfill and any grant funds received for the program. b. All collected Recyclables will be marketed at fair salvageable value, as outlined in Section B.3 above, and any such net revenues as shall be obtained from such sales shall be retained by Grantee as an offset against operating expenses. The City shall be notified of significant changes in fair salvageable values in writing as part of the quarterly reporting requirements. c. Recyclables collected in the Program will be diverted from disposal in the landfill, thereby resulting in a cost savings to the Grantee ("Landfill Diversion Credit"). On a monthly basis, Grantee will determine the recycled material tonnage collected and the resulting Landfill Diversion Credit based on the landfill disposal cost approved by Council for refuse collection rates and will credit this savings during the first year of operation as an offset against operating expenses. When reevaluating program costs in subsequent years, the City agrees to consider Landfill Diversion Credits of less than 100 percent. The amount will be subject to negotiation and the intent is to provide an economic incentive for the Grantee towards increased participation and program success. d. Any grant funds received will be applied to the costs of the Program when award is noticed or during the next rate review procedure if the award takes place once a specifiC rate has been determined, with the intent of directly reducing the monthly fee to the rate payer. 2. Rates for Collection - It is the City's intent to ensure that the rates charged to the citizens for the Yard Waste Recycling Pro- gram are appropriate and equitable. The City hereby establishes the following fees and charges for Residential Yard waste services, based on using the service, using the service with a resident's own container, or using the service with a Laidlaw- provided container, either rented or purchased. These fees and 9 Jl1<rtr1l--" charges are subject to change by the Council by resolution from time to time as the Council determines necessary. The Council directs that the below listed fees and charges shall be placed in the City's Master Fee Schedule, and any amendments hereto shall be by resolution amending said Master Fee Schedule: - Optional Service Levels. Each Item below is in the alternative: 1. Charge if Resident is Not Using System * . . . $0.00 2. Subscription Services, Monthly Fee with Rental A. For Laidlaw Container Rental ...... $1.00 B. For Weekly Collection Services * * *. . . . . $2.00* * Total Monthly Fee for Services With Rental. . . . $3.00 3. Subscription Services, Monthly Fee with Purchase of Container. A. For Weekly Collection Services***. . . .$2.00 B. One-Time Laidlaw Container Purchase Price. . . . . . . . . . . . .. $50.00-$70.00* 4. Pay-As-You-Go Services, Sticker Purchases - A. For 5 cans or bundles per Sticker. . . . $1.00 Notes to Service Charges * Requires composting of yardwaste (consistent with rules and regulations for composting in Sections 8.25.040 and 8.25.090) or self-haul. Yardwaste may no longer be put in regular trash. ** Purchase of Laidlaw Container Required If Resident Desires Not to Rent Laidlaw Container. See Item 3 Below. *** Service price entitles Resident to put out weekly 1 Laidlaw container (65 gal) and up to 6 bundles in addition to the Laidlaw container. Specific rate review procedures will be used by the City which are consistent with the procedures used for normal Refuse' Collection. Council intends to provide annual reviews of the aforementioned fees and charges, and currently intends that same shall occur on - 10 ,IJf",t() (P-2JD or about May 31 st of each year. Rate review will consider adjustments for actual sale of Recyclables and Landfill Diversion Credits in previous period compared to original estimated amounts. Shortfalls or overages will be used in determining rates for upcoming periods. Rate review will be conducted as referenced in Section 9 of the Franchise as amended, including the amendment created by Ordinance No. 2104, Rates for Collection. An increase in rates for Yard Waste Recycling services will be subject to the same limitations and conditions for Refuse Collection rates listed in Section 9. E. Record Keeoing and Reoorts - Grantee agrees to accurately record collection data sufficient to comply with the reporting requirements delineated below and shall file with the City written quarterly and annual reports of Grantee's performance under this ordinance as follows: 1. Quarterlv Program Reoorts - Within fifteen (15) working days after the last day of each quarter, Grantee shall submit a Quarterly Program report to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Tonnage summary of all Franchised Recyclables Recovered, by material and including a revenue statement of all sales of Franchised Recyclables from the Program, by material. b. Salvageable value for all Recyclables collected from the Yard Waste Recycling Program by the Grantee and/or its processor assignee. The weight receipts and salvageable value for material at the time processed shall be available for inspection by the City. c. Total number of customers served in the Program and resident participation rates in terms of an overall Program average. Any increases to the number of customers serviced shall also be reflected. d. Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in the Program operation, to include specifically contamination occurrences, listed by Residence. Grantee agrees to monitor Program participation to reflect general participation by residents, contamination problems, other problems and assess need for additional public outreach activities. e. Report of all education and community outreach efforts conducted during the quarter. 11 ~ (p-2,-,f f. Overall assessment of performance during the quarter. g. Recommendations to increase tonnage of Franchised Recyclable materials recovered. -., 2. Annual ReDort - On or before July 31 of each year of the term of this ordinance, Grantee shall submit a fiscal year-end annual report to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A collated summary of the information contained in the quarterly reports and a summary of the average overall Program participation rates and tonnages of recovered Franchised Recyclables. b. Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in the Program operation, measures taken to resolve problems, increase efficiency and Program participation. Number of complaints listed by type of complaint, i.e., missed pick-up, quality of service, etc., that occurred during the year. c. Report of all education and community outreach efforts conducted during the year and a discussion of their general impact on participation and recovered tonnages. d. Overall assessment of performance during the year. -, e. Recommendations to increase tonnage of recyclable materials recovered. f. Additional information as necessary to meet State and/or Federal mandated reporting requirements. F. Performance Standards - This ordinance for Residential Yard Waste Recycling services is subject to the performance standards and franchise conditions detailed in Section 14 Forfeiture of the franchise (ordinance No. 1993). While it is the intent of Section 23 to describe specific Yard Waste collection services to be provided by the Grantee in addition to existing refuse collection and disposal services, Grantee agrees that unacceptable performance of recycling services will be considered severable from its other obligations under the Franchise. Every reasonable effort must be made by the Grantee to maintain high levels of participation in order to reach the City's established diversion goals and assist in meeting the diversion standards set out in Assembly Bill 939 and the City and County's Mandatory Recycling Ordinances. -, 12 ft~ 22-(,-1/1../ G. Additional Franchise Fee - The Grantee, as part of the consideration of this ordinance, agrees to pay to the City an additional franchise fee at a rate consistent with that paid for refuse collection and detailed in Section 4 Consideration of the Franchise, as amended by Ordinance 2104. This rate will be set at eight percent (8%) of the annual Gross Receipts collected by said Grantee within the City of ChLila Vista from residents for the Yard Waste Recycling Program within the City unless increased by resolution of the City Council. It is understood that any such increase in the franchise fee by the City shall be cause for the Grantee to increase charges in order to "pass through" the cost of the franchise fee. H. Term - it is the intent of the City that the term for the provision of Residential Yard Waste Recycling Services shall be to the year 2002, subject, however, to the right of the City to cancel same upon giving a two year notice of cancellation by the City without cause which cannot be tendered sooner than the end of the third year from the date of the adoption of the ordinance enacting this Section. The services remain cancelable for cause at any time. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by ~ "--- Stephanie Snyder Principal Management Assistant Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney F :\home\attorney\ywfran. fin 13 /l J _ 2.rJ - -')_2. -, t Vi' - ~ -, TIllS PAGE BLANK .- - )J(- 2:.t ~ - J.J( Attachment B DU"ector of Finance, the Sanitary Service will be notified to reduce the recycling charge in time for lr:'" nex: regularly scheduled billing cycle. F. This reduced rate program for senior citizens and low income households shall become effe";:,I"" January 1, 1991, or at a later date which signals the implementation of the residential curbSide' recycling program. (Ord. 2492 ~2, 1992; Ord, 2428 ~1, 1990). 8.25.040 Separation of Recyclable Materials, Storage, and Containers. A. The o....'1"le;, operator, and/or occupant of any premise, business establishment, industry, or ot~c; propeny, vacant or occupied, shall be rebunably presumed to be the generators of, and be responslb:e for, L':t safe and sanitary storage of all Solid Waste, Designated Recyclables, and Compost accum"..lb~c'd on the property. The Designated Recyclables and Compost shall be stored separately from Re:~:se, The property O\\'1"ler, operator, or occupant shall store such Solid Waste, Designated Recyclables, cmc COm?0Sr on the premises or property in such a manner so as not to constitute a fire, health, or s<ifery hazard, and shall require it to be handled in such a manner so as not to promote the propa~(i:IO;.. har::- - ~age, or anac:ion of vectors, or the creation of liner or other nuisances, B, A Contai:1er or Containers for Designated Recyclables shall be provided by the Contract or Francl':1se Agent(s) for ar.y premises generating Residential or Commercial Recyclables, for the exterior collection of Designated Recydables. Containers for Industrial Recyclables shall be provided by the gener:1tor of Uoe Desipated Recyclables, unless otherv,ise arranged through the City Manager. The Contai:1ers sha:! E:1c::i\'e!y seSTegare the Designated RecycJables from refuse, CA.: s-..:ct: C0:1:2:ners to be used in rhe Cil)'s Recycling programs shall be approved by the Cll)' ~1?n;':-'l-: ::-. COl1.;-..:,.CllOr: witr. the Contran or FranchIse Agent(s) (or, in the case of Industrial Recyc](ib:c~ :", gerlera:o:s of ::-:e Inc'Js:r:a; RecyclLi:';es) :), Desi~.2:"?d Recyclab:es shall be sorted according to l)'Pe and/or as established by prograr:-. g'.;lce::r..'s ar:d place': in separate Conta;:1ers, Containers with segregated companments, or commingled (1,. o:-:e Recycli:-:g Cor.tainer), as agreed upon by the City Manager and the Contract or Franchise Ager::;:s). Cont2:ners, if more than one, shall be grouped together and placed for collection at the same tllT,e ?s whe,. replar Refuse colie:tion occurs or at designated Recycling collection times (if differen: fr0:T1 Rebse co11ec:ion) 2nc at Designated Recycling Collection Locations, E. .~! Cor-tainers used for Recycling pl:rposes, storage or collection, including Commercial and lndu~:;;;'; Recycling Conra::-:ers used in City Recycling programs as well as all other Containers used for recyc;lng purposes wheL'1er owned or operated by a commercial entity, nonprofit organization, or any other persons or entity shall be identified with the name and current telephone number of the owner 0; the responsible agency or person, Commercial recycling Containers shall remain locked at all tImeS 1f: order to discourage scavenging and prevent dumping of refuse in the Container. unless exempted hy the City Manager in ~onjunction with the Contract or Franchise Agent(s). F. Containers which do not comply with the requirements of this section shall be presumed to be re:\lse and taken by the Contract or Franchise Agent(s) for disposal or potential use as Salvaging or Recyclin~ Containers, G. It shall be unJawf..;] for any person to dispose, dump, or otherwise place material other than Designated Recyclables, in a Designated Recycling Container or at a Designated Recycling CollectIon or Storage Location, 522.7 (R 3/92) ~~~ Exemption. Designated Recyclables which are source sorted by their generator for the purpose of recycling by selling them to a Buy-back Center or donating them to a City licensed nonprofit or community group conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds do not have to be placed in the Designated Recycling Container required by this Section, nor placed in a Designated Recycling Collection Location in accordance with this Section. When Designated Recyclables are received by a City licensed nonprofit or community group conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds they shall be stored and sorted in accordance with this Section and transported to a Buy-back Center for the purpose of recycling. ---, (Ord. 2492 ~1, 1992). 8.25.050 Mandatory Recycling Implementation Schedule. On and after the date below it shall be mandatory for all generators of Residential, Commercial, and lndusrrial RecyclabJes in the City to separate from Refuse, (or Recycling purposes, all Designated Recyclables nnd otherwise participate in Recycling as described by this Chapter. Sector Effective Enforcement Date Residential Single-Family (as defined in Ordinance No. 2443) 03/01/92 Indus"i2.1 10/01/92 Yard and Wood Waste 01/01/93 ..-. Com;r;ercial: Office and Hospitality 07/01/93 Reside:-:tial Multi-Family 07/01/93 (Ord 2492 ~1, 1992). 8.25.060 Recycling Programs. :\ The Clty r-.1anager shall establish and promulgate reasonable regulations, guidelines and other program related specifics as to the implementation of Recycling programs for Residential, Commercial, and Indusrrial Recycling, including the method for Collection of Designated Recyc1ables. B. Commercial and Industrial establishments shall develop their respective win.housew Recycling plans that provide for the Collection of Designated Recyc1ables in conjunction with the City's established Recycling programs. The City and the Contract or Franchise Agent(s) shall assist in program development, provide technical expertise, and training materials. C. Collection of Designated Recyc1ables from single-family Residential units shall minimally occur once weekly. For Commercial and Industrial entities, collection shall be provided as needed to meet demand. D. The CIty encourages use of buy-back centers, donation centers (for used furniture and other reusable bulky items, and nonprofit agents), scrap dealers, home and commercial Composting, source reduction, anc other creative, la'v\ful and environmentally sound efforts to reduce waste in accordance with this --- (R 3/92) 522-8 HI -'J li. ~ -.1J{) Chapter that do not conflict with any established or planned City sponsored Recycling, Compos;l:1f or source reduction programs. (Ore 2492 ~l, 1992). 8.25.070 Reports. All Commercial and Industrial establishments shall submit recycling tonnage documentation or: :lr. annual basis to the City's Conservation Coordinator, due on or before January 31, for the pre\ious yei\~. Annual reporting shall be on the form promulgated by the City Manager, and commence on the fn: anniversary of the date set forth in the mandatory recycling implementation schedule as established in this Chapter. Voluntary reporting prior to the required mandatory recycling is encouraged. (Ord. 2492 S), 1992) . 8.25.080 Scavenging. A It shz:l be unlawful for any person other than authorized Ciry personnel or Contract o~ Franchise Age:n (s) to remove any separated Designated Recyclable(s) or salvageable commodity from any Designated Recycli:1g Collection or Storage Location, or Designated Recycling Container Howeve~, the original generator of the Designated Recyclables, may for any reason, remove the Designilled Recycla bles placed by said generator from the Designated Recycling Container or Designated Recyclmg Collection or Storage Locanon in which said generator had originally placed them. B It shall be unJav.fuJ for any person to distu:-b, modify, harm, or otherwise tamper with any Conra!ner or Designated Recyclmg Collection or Storage Location containing Designated Recyclables, or the conter-ts thereof, or to remove any such Container from the location where the same was pli1ced by the ge:lerator the;eof, or to remove the contents of any such Container, unless authonzec by the gcr.erator 0: such Des:g;;aled RecyclabJes or a duly authorized City personnel or ContrilC 0:- F;2:!c\:se A<;:e-::: (s) (Ord 249:: S:, 1992). 8.25.090 Composting. A Every establisher of a Composting pile, bi:1, holding area or other such Composting sysle:T. S:-.2:; fnl oblal:! a permit from the City, if the total volume used within the boundaries of the p;em:ses fa; Compostm~ IS 15 cubic yards or greater. B Every Compo sting pile, bin, holding area or other such Composting system shall be mamtillnec so as to not create a public nuisance through visual, odor, safety andlor other means, or as prescnbec Ii'. Chapter 19.66 of the Chula VIsta Municipal Code. C. The owner, operator, or occupier of property containing a Compost pile, bin, holding area or othe; such Composting system that is greater than 5 feet high, 5 feet wide and 5 feet in length shall weekly monitor temperature, through utiliz.ation of a thermometer designed for such purposes. 522.9 (R 3/92) --Pf::ZTltJ - ~ 7 t"o single Compost pile, bin, holding area or other such Composting system on a Residential Single. Fa~;ly (as defined in Ordinance No. 2443) premises shall be more than 5 feet in height and/or greater than 6 feet in v.'idth or length - ;o~;; 2492 ~}, 1992). 8.25.100 Enforcement. p., The City Manager or designee is responsible for enforcing the provisions of this Chapter. B Types of materials included in Designated Recyclables may be administratively deleted by the City Manager under emergency conditions (to include market failures), subject to formal ordinance amendment approved by the City Council, if such conditions persist. C t"othing in this ordinance or its implementing regulations shall prevent the City or its Contract or Franchise Agent(s) from efforts to obtain voluntary compliance by way ofwaming, notice of violation, educauonal or other means. (Ord 2492 ~1, 1992). 8.25.1] 0 Severability. ]f any pro\lsio:"., clause, sentence or paragraph of this Chapter or the application thereof to any person (\~ cl~cumsta:Jces shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall nOT affect the other provisions or application of I~t: p~O\'iSlOns of this Chapter which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and I( 1:-::5 end the pro\-isions of this Chapter are hereby declared to be severable. (Ord. 2492 ~1, 1992). _. - (R 3/92) 522-10 pf<ff t'I? - 2.8 () c Q) E .c. u ro ..... ;; > w > Q:: ~ C/) w ..... (,!) z ::i () > () W Q:: ..J ~ o ... w C/) ~ LL. W Q:: LL. C/) (,!) z ::i () > () W Q:: LL. C/) w ... C/) c( ~ C Q:: c( > ~ C3 Q) 2 Ol (") Ol [D <( (") ~ ~ III u .5 N N 'l:t ~ ~ LO CD o ~ ~ (") (") ~ ~ 'l:t N N ~ "'0 ro .0 III -= ro () Q) in ro 3: "'0 '- ro > Q) '- ..... ro ~ III Ol C ::l ~<( co~ C ::l 213 'C .5 "'015 ~ c _ en - Q) III 0 ~"C Q) Q) '- ..... Olro "'00:: C ro C Q) ro III U ::l - Q) '- - ..... ::l o :5 .~ '- Q) 0. III "'0 C Q) ro ~ a.i u ro III 'l:t"5lB o en U +-' .- .E "'OLO ~CD<1> N2 '~~.& - -0"" ..... ~~~ N<1>c ;;~1!! (") (") 'l:t ~ ~ (") N (") ~ ~ LO I'- 00 tI7 o ~ o Ol ~ ~ ~ tI7 o o N ~ ro ..... III :> 1!! ::l .c. () o "'0 ro C o '- o () a.i III ro ~ u .5 Q) 2 0. ;;:; ;;:: "'0 C 1!! ..... III ::l Ol ::l <( <1> "'0 ::l 13 .5 - o c en Q) o "C Q) ..... ro 0:: LO LO ~ ~ tI7 LO 00 6 ~ ~ N 00 ~ ~ 00 00 ~ ~ '- ro :E 03 Cl N 00 M ~ ..... ro "'0 Q) III o 0. o '- 0. .!a Q) ..... III ro 3: "E ro > Qi ..... III ro 3: "'0 '- ro > o ~ CD ~ 'l:t ~ ~ (") Ol N ~ ~ (") N ~ tI7 E ro '- Ol o '- 0. o C C o 'ro- () iIi a.i III ro ~ u .5 <1> 2 g ;;:: "'0 C 1!! ..... III ::l Ol ::l <( co t ro 0. III Q) "0 ::l 13 C Ol I'- CD ~ ~ 00 I'- 'l:t ~ tI7 ~ o N ~ Q) III ::l - Q) '- .5 o .5 III ro ..... 'c '0 c UJ a.i 2 III co .~ Q) ..... ro E III ::l o "E ro N ro .c. ~ <1> 2 Ol (") en [D <( '- .E CD 'l:t ~ III Q) "0 ::l 13 .5 CD- ~ 6 N ~ Ol en L() ~ tI7 ?; C 3: o .5 ~ I'- M ~ o "'0 'C C o U III UJ 'l:t N CD ~ ~ 15 c en Q) o "C Qi 2 Ol (") Ol [D <( en LO ~a.i III III ro Q) Q) "0'- ::l U 13 .5 .5 <1> .-2 20. ~;;:; 3:= "E:C ro C >1!! !1Ci) o ::l :5Ol .~ ~ ciQ) 'l:t"O M.2 ~ U ~,5 LO CD (") ~ tI7 (") I'- o ~ ~ Ol LO 00 o N tI7 ~ ~ N o o ~ ~ .c. U ro Q) [D co .~ <1> 0. E ro III Q) :E ro -I E ro '- Ol o '- 0. o C a.i III ro ~ U ,5 Q) ~ g ii: "'0 C 1!! ..... III ::l Ol ::l <( o .5 - o C en Q) o "C Qi ..... III ro 3: "E ro > o ~ o LO N ~ ~ (") ~ ~ ~ ~ '" I'- (") ~ ~ E ro '- Ol o '- 0. o C Q) > o .... (9 C o E <1> -I a.i III ro ~ U .5 Q) 2 0. ;;:; Vi Q) 2 Q) ..... III ro 3: 32 "6 III "0 Q) ..... ro ~ .5 'l:t I'- (")"""" ~l!! C Q) .... ii: "0 C 1!! co C 2t: 'C~ "'0 .... ro 0 c; roOl ~~ 0.0 III C c';;; ~2 'iij Q) <1>..... .... III _ ro ~3: cri"E ~ ro ~ > ..... III ::l Ol ::l <( o .5 - o C en Q) o "C LO LO (") ~ ~ co '0 ..... C o C 00 CD 'l:t ~ tI7 co B Q) III ::l - Q) '- ~ o C .5 o .5 co B o CD (") ~ .5 o .5 ~ C3 co C o ;;:; ro Z <1> "0 'iij C ro <1> U o a.i III ro ~ U .5 <1> 2 0. ;;:; a.i III ro <1> .... U .5 <1> 2 0. ;;:; ;;:: "'0 C 1!! ;;:: "'0 C 1!! a.i 2 ..... en ::l Ol ::l <( o .5 - o C en Q) o "C Qi ..... en ro 3: "'0 .... ro > o ~ o 00 N ~ ~ in ::l Ol- ::l III <(~ 0~ .5 "'0 C 151!! C.c. enOl Q) ::l o e "C.c. - Qi"'O in'ffi roo. 3: III "'0 ._ .... ro <1> >2 ..eOl 3: .5 -13 LO> 00 U '<1> ~o:: o 00 N ~ ~ LO 00 en ~ E ro .... Ol o '- 0. o C ^ CD N ~ ~ v E ro '- Ol o '- 0. o C E ro .... Ol o .... 0. o C > ro 3: o a.. III o U '- ro :E C ro U) a.i III ro <1> '- U .5 <1> 2 0. ;;:; ii: "'0 C 1!! - III ::l Ol ::l <( <1> "'0 ::l 13 .5 - o c en Q) o "C CD CD (") ~ ~ CD Ol ai ~ Ol I'- ~ ~ ~ Ol ~ ~ .c. U ro Q) [D ro C ro "6 U) <1> 2 Ol (") Ol [D <( .... .E I'- o ~ III U .5 'l:t o LO ~ ~ ~ CD ~ ~ ~ CD I'- ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ro - III :> "0 (].J ro Vi (].J (/) .~ (].J .r. (5 (/) (/) (].J "2 ::l .r. 1: o E ~ (].J 0. "0 (5 .r. (].J (/) ::l o .r. ~ (].J 0. l!? ltl (/) l!? ::l Cl lo:: ~ (/) ltl ~ > ltl "0 c: .2 U ~ (5 u (].J (/) .2 l!? (].J c: o (/) $ ~ (].J (/) .2 OJ ~ E ~ Cl o 0. (].J Vi ltl ~ "0 is > OJ .; ~ .E 'iti '0 ~ (].J E E o u ~ 'Q) .; .r. Cl ::l o ~ .; (/) OJ ro ~ ~ .Q (/) Vi o U 0. (].J (].J ,:,,!. .E ~ (].J "0 o .E Cl .~ u > u (].J ~ ~ 1: (].J "0 'Vi (].J ~ ~ 'Q) .; ~ (].J (].J ~ > (/) ltl >"0 ltl (].J "0 ro N c: ~ c: $ .2 'iti U ~ (].J (5 = U c: (].J 0 (/) "0 .2 (].J (].J U ~ ~ "0 (5 ~ U > (].J Vi .J:J 5 .~ 'S: (].J (].J ~ Vi 0. ltl {3 ~ ltl "0 OJ ro co > 'iti "0 'C: c: (].J ltl 0. .E ] ro c: :~ 'a> (].J N '6 'Vi .J:J ::l (/) 'iti "0 ltl .J:J (/) 't: ltl U "0 c: ltl ~ i:3 'iti c: .2 ro z OJ > o (5 c: o E OJ ...J M N ~.2-i -..... TIllS PAGE BlANK - - ~~o 10 September 21, 1993 FROM: SUBJECT: Councilman Jerry Rindone John D. Goss, City Manager~ Response to Questions regarding the September 21, 1993 Agenda TO: Following are staff's responses to your comments/questions regarding items on the above referenced Council agenda. Item 6 - Yard Waste Ordinance 1. IN ADDITION TO CHULA VISTA, WHAT OTHER CITIES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY HAVE ALREADY SET UP OR ARE ALREADY PLANNING TO SET UP A YARD WASTE RECYCLING PROGRAM. PLEASE BE SPECIFIC AND NAME THE CITIES. Because of the County's mandatory ordinance, ~ cities in San Diego County either have a program or will be setting up a program. The only cities (other than Chula Vista and San Marcos*) which do not have a program on-line right now are East County cities, which are not mandated to implement their programs until January 1994. Current Proqrams Pendinq Implementation Carlsbad Coronado Del Mar Encinitas Escondido Imperial Beach National City Oceanside Solana Beach Vista El Cajon La Mesa Lemon Grove Poway Santee *Staff is trying to obtain information on why San Marcos does not yet have its program in effect. 2. OF THE CITIES THAT HAVE SET UP OR ARE PLANNING TO SET UP A YARD WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, DESCRIBE THE SYSTEM THEY ARE PLANNING TO ESTABLISH. (FOR EXAMPLE, WILL IT BE A UNIVERSAL RATE SYSTEM OR SOME TYPE OF BIFURCATED PAY-AS-YOU-GO SYSTEM?) All other cities are offering or planning to offer only a mandatory universal rate system at this time. In the unincorporated area, where there are numerous service providers and no franchises, all haulers are required to offer yard waste pickup and most offer it by subscription to a uniform rate charge. None of these haulers offer any other options. t~ This information was originally gathered by City staff in August 1993 and verified today with the two outside sources most recently collecting and verifying yard waste information from all cities: a. County of San Dieqo - Solid Waste Division staff responsible for monitoring and enforcing the County's mandatory source separation ordinance; and b. City of Santee - Currently surveying all cities because of deliberations on franchising. City staff was unable to independently reconfirm this data today with all 16 cities due to time constraints. 3. PLEASE PROVIDE A CHART OUTLINING THE CURRENT RATES FOR REGULAR TRASH HAULI NG (I NCLUD I NG RECYCLI NG), THE COST FOR THE YARD WASTE RECYCLI NG PROGRAM I F ONE I SIN PLACE OR I S PLANNED TO BE PUT I N PLACE, AND THE OVERALL AGGREGATE COST OF BOTH REGULAR AND YARD WASTE PROGRAMS. a. Current Proqrams Refuse + Yard Recycl inq* Waste Total Carlsbad 11.98 2.24 14.22 Coronado 10.65 2.00 12.65 Del Mar 12.67 1.88 14.55 Encinitas 16.79 i nc 1. **16.79 Escondido 18.13 2.03 20.13 Imperial Beach 15.24 1.00 ***16.24 National City 13.55 i nc 1 . **13.55 Oceanside 14.68 3.60 18.28 Solana Beach 11.75 1. 91 13.66 Vista 13.44 1.60 15.04 *Based on refuse rates in effect in August 1993, most rates do not include any recent pass-through of the increased tip fee at the landfill. **Encinitas and National City include the yard waste rate in the total refuse rate and did not provide a breakdown. ***Imperial Beach previously had refuse collection 2 days/wk. To keep costs low for the yard waste program, one refuse collection day was eliminated, and yard waste will be collected on the alternate day. ~ ~3;2, b. Pendinq Implementation Refuse + Recyclinq* Proposed Yard Waste Projected Total El Cajon La Mesa Lemon Grove Poway Santee Chula Vista 14.16 13.40 12.50 12.80 12.25-19.40 14.43 3.82 unavailable unavailable unavailable 2.50 options 17.98 **14.75-21.90 *Based on refuse rates in effect ln August 1993. Rates for El Cajon, Santee and Chula Vista reflect a pass-through of the tip fee increase, while rates for La Mesa, Lemon Grove and Poway do not include the increase. **Santee currently has multiple haulers and reports rates as a range of the lowest to the highest. Recycling rates are included in this total as an average rate, since they vary with the hauler. Proposed yard waste cost is based on. current charge for voluntary subscription offered by one hauler, and expected to be universal rate charge when program implemented. JDG:mab ?/3;S AGENDA PACKET SCANNED AT FIRST ORDINANCE i\\Ot\ REAOINO ON, q-ci - '1.5 ORDINANCE NO. ;?Sc..olj ~Q ~'? AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY Q.F;.O\\'\%LA VISTA ADDING CHAPTER 8.23 ENTITLED, "W~~\:.RANAGEMENT FRANCHISE" TO THE CHULA VISTA ~~ CODE The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows: - '... SECTION I: That Section 8.23.010 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.010 Definitions. Whenever in this ordinance the words or phrases hereinafter in this section defined are used, they shall have . the respective meaning assigned to them in the following definitions (unless in the given instance, the context wherein they are used shall clearly import a different meaning) : A. "Aluminum" means recoverable aluminum materials such as used beverage containers, siding, screening, and other manufactured items. B. "Bulky Waste" means large items of solid waste such as White Goods, furniture, large auto parts, trees, stumps and other oversize wastes whose large size precludes or complicates their handling by normal collection, processing or disposal methods. C. "Buy-back Center" means a facility which pays a fee for the delivery and transfer of ownership to the facility of. source separated materials for the purpose of recycling, mulching or composting. D . "City" shall mean the City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation of the State of California in its present incorporated form or in any later reorganized, consolidated, enlarged or reincorporated form. E. "Collection" means the act of collecting Solid Waste materials, or Recyclables at Residential, commercial, industrial, or governmental sites, and hauling it to a facility for processing, transfer, disposal or burning. F. "Contract or Franchise Agent (s)" means any person or entity designated by the City Council pursuant to Article XII of the City Charter and Chula vista Municipal Code, Chapter 8.24, as being responsible for 1 7-1 administering, d' recting, supervising, collecting, _ operating and/or p oviding for the disposal or transfer of refuse, or t e collection and/or processing of Designated Recycla lese G. "Curbside Collection" means the collection of Designated Recyclab es from the Residential waste stream from the curb or al eyway. May include single-family, Multi-family residen es and mobile home trailer courts that receive curbsid collection of refuse or that are otherwise specially designated as having curbside collection. H. "Designated Recycling Collection or storage Location" means a place designated by the City Manager in conjunction with the C tract or Franchise Agent(s) for pick up or storage of r cyclables segregated from other waste material. Desi nated Recycling Collection or storage Locations inclu e, but are not limited to, the curbside of a Resident al neighborhood; the service alley, loading dock, basement of a commercial enterprise or Multi-famil complex. I. "Designated Recycl ng Containers" ("Containers") shall mean those containers or receptacles designated by the City Manager or its Con ract or Franchise Agent for pick-up or storage of Desig ated Recyclables. -- J. "Designated Recycla les" means materials that are recyclable, reclaimable, nd/or reusable within the following categories of Res dential, commercial and industrial and as defined more s ecifically herein within each category. Any material ha 'ng an economic value on the secondary materials market or that is otherwise sal vageabl~ shall be included and or other materials that have been separated from other Re idential, commercial, or industrial Solid Waste for purp ses of being recycled for resale and/or reuse, and pIa ed at a Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location or in a Designated Recycling Container f the purpose of collection and processing, or an such Designated Recyclables materials collected und r a Mixed Waste Processing program. K. "Exterior Recycling Containers" eans Designated Recycling containers to be used for out ide storage of Franchised Recyclables. L. "Franchised Recyclables" means an Residential Recyclables, as defined herein and by CVMC Chapter 8.25, placed in Designated Recycling containers placed at - 2 --,r- .- ~ 7-~ Council Agenda statement Submitted by: , 7 "'"' Ite~:) r\\O\"' ~ Meeting ~~~tP~sePtember 14 1993 ~';r Ordinance No. ~~ ~~ING CHAPTER 8.23 ENTITLED "WASTE ENT FRANCHISE" TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIP~~ E x,c,U'" (). t> Bruce M. Bo~gaard, city Attorney\O~ Item Title: Agenda Classification: (X ( ( ( Consent Action Item Public Hearing Other: 4j5ths Vote: ( ) Yes (X) No Our existing trash franchise with Laidlaw was originally articu- lated in an ordinance adopted in 1982 that has been amended 6 prior times, and is about to be amended a 7th time to expand it for residential recycling. It is getting unmanageable by staff, franchisee, and the public to try to ascertain its currently applicable provisions. The attached ordinance makes no substantive changes not previously made by the Council in each of the prior amendments. It simply brings them all current into a single document, and codifies them into the Municipal Code for quick reference. It is intended as a "technical consolidation effort" only. Recommendation: Adopt the attached Ordinance. Boards and Commissions Recommendation: None applicable. Discussion: The basis for our current franchise was Ordinance No. 1993, adopted August 3, 1982. It has since been amended by Ordinance No. 2104 extending the franchise term on February 28, 1985; No. 2332 excepting from the franchise competitively bid school contracts on September 12, 1989; No. 2427 to collect recyclable materials and to resell said materials on December 4, 1990; No. 2429 relating to public education of recycling savings on December 11, 1990; No. 2475 clarifying methodology for calculating future rate increase to collect and dispose of refuse on September 3, 1991; and by Ordinance No. 2562 relating to multifamily residential recyling, adopted on July 20, 1993. ~1-( .-" The attached ordinance will codify and sectionalize all of the foregoing into Chapter 8.23 of the Municipal Code without substantive amendment. Laidlaw's Position on the Consolidation Laidlaw has advised the City Attorney that they do not ob- ject to the consolidation effort, but that they have a pending request to make substantive changes to the franchise, and they do not want their consent to the consolidation effort to be inter- preted to be a waiver of their pending request for substantive revisions to the franchise terms, a request that they will be continuing to prosecute through the City Manager's office and thereafter to the Council. The City Attorney concurs that their lack of object to the consolidation should not be interpreted as a waiver of their right to request changes to the franchise terms. The Advantaqes of Consolidation , with consolidation in a single Municipal Code Chapter, the franchise can be more easily understood by staff and the public. - Subsequent modifications can be "plugged in" as amendments on a section-by-section basis to the Code without a universal reprinting of the uncodified ordinance. The amendment process should produce a more coherent overall document because all prior and effective amendments can be seen simultaneously. We can also expect fewer mistakes in understanding the provisions of the franchise since we will be able to see all current provisions in a single document. Should Substantative Amendments Be Made at This Time? It order to keep this change as non-controversial and purely technical as possible, it is recommended that the current franchise arrangement get consolidated and incorporated into the Municipal Code without substantative amendment at this time. Later, once it is codified in the code, we can make such substantative amendments as the Council desires. Fiscal Impact: None. F: \bomelanomeyltrasbord. wp .-" ~'r'- . 7-2.-, Designated Recycling Collection or storage Location (s) to be collected by the Grantee, excluding yard waste. M. "Garbage" means all kitchen and table waste, and animal or vegetable waste that attends or results from the storage, preparation, cooking, or handling of food stuffs, except organic wastes separated therefrom and used in composting in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.25, section 8.35.090. N. "Glass Bottles and Jars" means food and beverage containers made from silica or sand, soda ash and limestone, the product being transparent or translucent and being used for packaging or bottling, including container glass designated redeemable under the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Law, Division 12.1 (commencing with Section 14500) of the California Public Resources Code, as well as glass jars and bottles without redeemable value ("scrap"), but excluding household, kitchen, and other sources of non-container glass such as drinking glasses, ceramics, light bulbs, window pane glass, and similar glass products that are not bottles or jars. o. "Grantee" shall mean Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. and its lawful successors or assigns. P. "Gross Receipts" shall mean all gross operating revenues received by Grantee from the collection and disposal of refuse or collection and sale of recyclable materials. Q. "Interior Recycling containers" means a small (approximately 6 gallon) Designated Recycling container to be provided to each eligible residential customer in the MUlti-family Recycling program. R. "Landfill" means a disposal system by which solid waste is deposited and compacted before burial in a specially prepared area which provides for environmental monitoring and treatment. S. "Mixed Waste Processing" means a system of recovering recyclables from the mixed waste stream through separation at a processing facility, transfer station, Landfill, or other such facility instead of separation at the waste generation source. T. "Multi-family" means a structure or structures containing a total of 3 or more dwelling units in any vertical or horizontal arrangement on a single lot or building site. 3 ~7-J U. "Newspaper" means newsprint-grade paper including any inserts that come in the paper, and excluding soiled paper, all magazines, and other periodicals, telephone books, as well as all other paper products of any nature. -. v. "Nuisance" means anything which is injurious to human health, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, and interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, and affects at the same time an entire communi ty or neighborhood, or any number of persons, although the extent of annoyance or damage inflicted upon the individual may be unequal, and which occurs as a result of the storage, removal, transport, processing, or disposal of Solid Waste, compost, and/or Designated Recyclables. W. "Plastic Bottle" means a plastic container with narrow neck or mouth opening smaller than the diameter of the container body, used for containing milk, juice, soft drinks, water, detergent, shampoo or other such substances intended for household or hospitality use; to distinguish from non-bottle containers (e.g., deli or margarine tub containers) and from non-household plastic bottles such as those for containing motor oil, solvents, and other non-household substances. - x. "Processing" means the reduction, separation, recovery, conversion, or Recycling of Solid waste. Y. "Recycling" shall mean any process by which materials which would otherwise become Solid Waste are collected (source separated, commingled, or as "mixed waste"), separated and/or processed and returned to the economic mainstream in the form of raw materials or products or materials which are otherwise salvaged or recovered for reuse. z. "Refuse" means Garbage and Rubbish. AA. "Removal" means the act of taking Solid Wastes or Designated Recyclables from the place of generation either by the Contract or Franchise Agent(s), or by a person in control of the premises. BB. "Removal Frequency" means frequency of removal of Solid Wastes or Recyclables from the place of generation. ce. "Residential" for purposes of this Chapter, means any building or portion thereof designed or used exclusively as the residence or sleeping place of one or -. 4 ~-~ more persons, including single and multiple family dwellings, apartment-hotels, boarding and lodging houses. Residential does not include short-term residential uses, such as motels, tourist cabins, or hostels which are regulated as Hospitality establishments as defined in Sub-Section U of CVMC Chapter 8.25. DO. "Residential Recyclables" means those specific recyclable materials from Residential Solid Waste (single family and mUlti-family) including, but not limited to, Aluminum, Glass Bottles and Jars, Newspaper, Plastic Bottles, Tin and Bi-Metal Cans, White Goods, and Yard Waste. EE. "Rubbish" means non-putrescible solid wastes such as ashes, paper, yard clippings, glass, bedding, crockery, plastics, rubber by-products or litter. Such materials that are designated as Recyclable or Compost may be exempt from categorizing as rubbish provided such materials are handled, processed and maintained in a properly regulated manner. FF. "Salvaging or Salvageable" means the controlled and/or authorized storage and removal of Solid Waste, Designated Recyclables or recoverable materials. GG. "Scavenging" means the uncontrolled and/or unauthorized removal of Solid Waste, Designated Recyclables or recoverable materials. HH. "To Segregate Waste Material" means any of the following: the placement of Designated Recyclables in separate Containers; the binding or bagging of Designated Recyclables separately from other waste material and plpcing in a separate container from Refuse, or the same container as Refuse; the physical separation of Designated Recyclables from other waste material (either at the generating source, Solid Waste transfer station, or processing facility). II. "Solid Waste" means all putrescible and nonputrescible solid, semi-solid and liquid wastes, such as Refuse, Garbage, Rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof, discarded home and industrial appliances, manure, vegetable or animal solid and semi- solid wastes, also includes liquid wastes disposed of in conjunction with Solid Wastes at Solid Waste transfer/processing stations or disposal sites, but excludes: sewage collected and treated in a municipal or regional sewage system or materials or substances having 5 ~7---7 commercial value or other importance which can be ~ salvaged for reuse, Recycling,composting or resale. JJ. "storage" means the interim containment of Solid Wastes, Yard Wastes, or Recyclables in an approved manner after generation and prior to disposal, Collection or processing. KK. "streets" shall mean the public streets, ways, alleys and places as the same now or may hereafter exist within said City, including state highways now or hereafter established within said city. LL. "Tin and Bi-Metal Cans" means any steel food and beverage containers with a tin or Aluminum plating. MM. "Transfer or Processing Station" means those facilities utilized to receive Solid Wastes and to temporarily store, separate, convert, or otherwise process the Solid Waste and/or Recyclables. NN. "unit" means an individual residence contained in a Residential MUlti-family complex. 00. "Whi te Goods" means kitchen or other large enameled appliances which includes, but is not limited to, refrigerators, washers, and dryers. -, PP. "Yard Wastes" means leaves, grass, weeds, and wood materials from trees and shrubs from single family and mUlti-family Residential sources (to include landscape haulings from residential sources). 1 SECTION II: That section 8.23.020 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.020 Purpose. The franchise to collect and dispose of Refuse and to collect Residential Recyclables, excluding Yard Waste, from single family and Multi-family dwellings within the City of Chula Vista in the manner and on the terms herein specified and to use for such purposes the Streets, ways When codified, you can say the following to incorporate other definitions by reference: "Capitalized terms used herein not herein in this Chapter specifically defined shall have the meaning specially ascribed to them as set forth in Chapter 8.25." _ 6 ~-6 and places within said City is hereby granted to Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. its successors and assigns. SECTION III: That section 8.23.030 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.030 Term. The franchise term shall be extended for the term of five (5) years from and after the current termination date of September 4, 1987 or until the state or some municipal or public corporation duly authorized by law shall purchase by voluntary agreement all property actually used and useful in the exercise of said franchise, or until said franchise shall be forfeited for noncompliance with its terms as provided herein. In addition, the Grantee shall have two five-year renewal options if the Grantee is not in breach of this ordinance and has performed in the manner found satisfactory by the City. The five-year extension and the two five-year options are conditioned upon the Grantee constructing a new operating service facility within the City of Chula vista within fifteen years (15) months of the adoption of this ordinance. Said facility including land and improvements to cost approximately $1.5 million. During such term, grantee shall have the exclusive right to collect and dispose of all refuse created, accumulated or produced within the City of Chula vista. SECTION IV: That section 8.23.040 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.040 Consideration. The Grantee of said franchise shall during the term thereof pay to the City four and one-half percent (4- 1/2%) of the gross annual receipts of said grantee. City is authorized to increase said fee up to a maximum amount of ten percent (10%). Beginning April 1, 1986, the franchise fee shall be increased by one-half percent (1/2%) and one-half percent (1/2%) each year thereafter until it reaches a maximum of ten percent. It is understood that any increase in the franchise fee by the City shall be cause for the Grantee to increase charges in order to "pass through" the cost of the franchise fee. SECTION V: That section 8.23.050 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.050 Reoorts. Dates of Payment and citv Audit. 7 ~7-0( The Grantee shall file with the Director of Finance of said City on a monthly basis commencing August 1, 1982, ~ and monthly thereafter, a duly verif ied statement showing in detail the total gross receipts of such Grantee during the preceding month or fractional month from the collection and disposal of refuse within said city. Grantee shall pay to said City within fifteen (15) days after the time of filing of such statement, in lawful money of the united states, the aforesaid percentage of its gross receipts for such month, or such fractional month, covered by such statement. Any neglect, or omission or refusal by Grantee to file such verified statement or to pay such percentage at the time and in the manner specified shall be grounds for the declaration of a forfeiture of this franchise and all rights of Grantee hereunder. SECTION VI: That Section 8.23.060 is ~ereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.060. Compliance with Laws. Grantee shall comply with all laws and regulations of the State of California and the City of Chula vista. Further Chapter 8.24 of the Chula vista Municipal Code is expressly made a part' of this franchise and it is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. Grantee and City agrees to be bound by all provisions of such ordinance, or any amendments thereto, or other ordinances that might affect the collection or disposal of refuse in the city. It is understood that said ordinances are intended to be minimum standards and that higher standards and regulations may be required under the franchise. ~~~ SECTION VII: That section 8.23.070 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.070. Obliqations of Grantee. Grantee undertakes and agrees, for the consideration hereinafter mentioned, to furnish: all labor, equipment, and vehicles (including adequate equipment and vehicles in a standby capacity to provide the service herein required in the event of a breakdown of equipment); insurance and bonds necessary to insure the eff icient and timely picking up, collecting, removing and disposing of City refuse; and to collect, pick up, remove and dispose of, all refuse which is generated or accumulated by or upon all property within the City during the time that this franchise is in effect, except as herein otherwise ~ 8 ~ 7-10 provided and subject to and in accordance with the terms and provisions hereof. The collection and removal of said refuse by Grantee shall be, at all times during the term of this franchise performed to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his delegate who shall have the right to issue orders, directions and instructions to grantee from time to time with respect to the collection, transportation, and removal of refuse, the performance of Grantee's services hereunder, and the Grantee's compliance with the provisions of the ordinances of the City of Chula vista as they now exist or may from time to time be amended, and Grantee agrees to comply therewith. Such collection and removal of refuse shall be done in a prompt, thorough, lawful and workmanlike manner. , Grantee shall submit a detailed plan of operation prior to beginning of his work pursuant to this franchise. It shall describe the routes to be established and shall contain details regarding servicing schedule, the equipment to be used, and alternate procedures to be followed in the event of severe weather or equipment failures. Grantee shall provide and maintain at his own expense, a solid waste collection system capable or providing service to all entities in the City requiring, or required to avail itself of said service. Not less than one regular weekly collection shall be provided to each residential unit. Grantee shall provide binds as required for commercial customers or whenever other customers of Grantee request their use. Each bin shall be placed in an accessible, outside location on a hard surface according to individual agreement. Grantee shall provide collection vehicles and equipment in amounts adequate to perform in accordance with its operational plan. Initially, and throughout the franchise term, the average age of all regularly assigned collection vehicles must be not more than four (4) years, and all must be radio controlled. Collection vehicles, containers, and other contractor furnished equipment must comply with the standards set forth in the Chula Vista Municipal Code. All refuse collected by Grantee shall become the property of Grantee immediately upon the collection thereof, and shall be forthwith removed and transported by Grantee to an approved place of disposal, which shall be provided, arranged for or furnished by Grantee. 9 ~7 '-11 In the event Grantee fails, refuses, or neglects to collect and dispose of refuse set out or placed for collection at the time and in the manner herein required, City may collect and dispose of the same or cause the same to be collected and disposed of and Grantee shall be liable for all expenses incurred in connection therewith. Such remedy of City shall be cumulative and in addition to any and all other remedies it may have in the event of such failure, refusal or neglect of Grantee. The collection and disposal of refuse by City or by others as aforesaid shall not be deemed an election of remedies which shall preclude City from availing itself of additional remedies for Grantee's breach of contract. The following shall be considered legal holidays for purposes of this agreement: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Any other days must have prior written approval from the City. When a regularly scheduled residential collection falls on a legal holiday, the collection for that day and succeeding days of that week shall be rescheduled one day later. Holiday ~isruptions of commercial collections shall be handled in a manner mutually agreeable to the Grantee and individual customers. Grantee agrees to provide and maintain litter containers for the use of the general public for public areas such as plazas and rights-of-way other than parks and those publicly owned facilities maintained by the city as specifically designated by resolution of the city and to empty and dispose of the contents as necessary. Grantee shall prepare and furnish to all customers not less than four (4) days prior to the beginning of, or change in service, schedules setting forth the days on which the collections shall be made. Notice shall be in such form as is first approved by the City Manager or his delegate. SECTION VIII: That Section 8.23.080 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.080. Disposal Reauirements. Grantee shall be obligated as set forth hereinabove to provide for the collection and the disposal of all refuse within the City of Chula Vista; provided, however, Grantee shall undertake the disposal of said refuse in accordance with specific direction of City if at any time during the period of this franchise, City shall determine 10 yn 7-72- .-" .-. ~ that the public interest requires a disposal program differing from that which the Grantee has established. SECTION IX: That section 8.23.090 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.090. Rates for Collection. A. Basis for Future Modifications. The rate charged to, and to be paid by waste removal ratepayers ("Ratepayers") in the City of Chula vista, shall be those as may from time to time be established by Council resolution determined in accordance with the provisions of this section. The rates to be charged at the time of the codification of this ordinance amending this section shall be those established by Resolution No. 16301, adopted on August 27, 1991. B. Rate Modification Procedure. Either Party may, upon filing a notice of intention to modify rates ("Notice of Intention") which contains accurate and complete information satisfactorily supporting any increase requested, forty-five (45) days in advance ("Notice Period") with the other Party, modify rates subject to the following conditions and limitations: 1. Contents of Notice of Intention. The Notice of Intention shall demonstrate for each type of service (residential, commercial), the existing rate; that portion of said rate charged for the purpose of reimbursing the Grantee for Grantee's landfill costs ("Landfill Rate Component"), that portion of said rate charged for the purpose of paying the required franchise fees imposed under the authority of this Ordinance ("Franchise Fee Rate Component"), and that portion of said rate charged for all other purposes ("Other Rate Component"); the amount of modification in each component of the rate that is being sought; the amount of the modification in the entire rate being sought; the amount of the new Rate Component; the amount of the new rate after the proposed modification; and the justification for said proposed modification. 2. "Other Rate Component" Chanaes. 11 ~ 71':; The proportion of modification to the "Other Rate Component" shall be limited by the proportion of change since grantee's last rate increase in the San Diego area Consumer Price Index'for all urban consumers as compiled by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for the latest twelve-month period for which statistics are available. In no event shall the amount of the increase exceed six percent (6%) of the service Rates. - a. In the event that the Consumer Price Index referred to in Paragraph (2) above shall no longer be published, then another similar generally recognized index may be substituted upon approval by the City Manager. 3. "Landfill Rate Component" Chanqes. The proportion of modification to the Landfill Rate Component shall not exceed the proportion of change since grantee's last rate increase in the rate charged by the County of San Diego to Grantee for "tipping fees" at the Otay Landfill, or if the Otay Landfill has been closed, at the next closest ~, operating landfill, for the latest twelve-month period. 4. Franchise Fee Rate Component Changes. The proportion of modification to the Franchise Fee Rate Component shall not exceed the proportion of change in the Franchise Fee that is or may be required by law to be paid to the City of Chula Vista. 5. Increase Approval Hierarchv. Annual modifications which constitute rate increases shall be subject to the review and written approval of the City Manager, unless the City Council shall, within 20 days ("Public Hearing Option Period") after the commencement of the Notice Period set the rate modification request for public hearing, in which case said rate increases shall be subject to, and not instituted until, the review and written approval of the City Council after said public hearing. 6. No Public Hearinq Approval Procedure. - 12 - /~- df- 7 ~/'-/ If the City Council has not set a public hearing during the Public Hearing Option Period, the City Manager shall notify grantee in writing of his approval or denial of the increase within five (5) days of the end of the Public Hearing Option Period. 7. Notice to Grantee of Public Hearinq Approval Procedure. The City Council shall have the unilateral right to require a hearing for any rate increase at its discretion. If the City intends to require a public hearing, it shall notify grantee within five (5) days after the end of the Public Hearing Option Period. 8. Automatic Approval. In the absence of any written communication from the City Manager or Council within five (5) days after the end of the Public Hearing option Period to the contrary, a modification representing a rate increase is deemed approved. 9. Frequency of Rate Increase Requests. No more than one such increase may be implemented in anyone calendar year although grantee shall have at any time the right to submit a request to the City Council for additional rate relief at any time extraordinary expenses are incurred. C. Senior Rate Schedules. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista may at anytime, by amending Chapter 8.24 of the Chula vista Municipal Code, establish a program for preferential rates for senior citizens or other classifications which are deemed to be in the public interest. D. Variable Rate Structure. Grantee agrees to discuss with the City the concept, design and implementation of a change in rate structure from a fixed rate to a rate structure which would vary based on the number and size of containers, or such other basis which the City believes would provide an incentive for waste reduction. SECTION X: That Section 8.23.100 is added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: 13 ".-- .., -/~ ~~~ Sec. 8.23.100 Insurance and Performance Bond. ........,. Grantee agrees, at Grantee's own expense, to carry comprehensive public liability and automobile liability insurance coverage during the full term of this franchise, with City also named as an additional insured thereunder, covering liability for bodily injuries, death and property damage, arising out of or in connection with the operations of Grantee, under this franchise in an amount not less than $1,000,000 for injuries including death to anyone person and in an amount not less than $5,000,000 for anyone accident or occurrence, and property damage in an amount not less than $200,000. Grantee further agrees to carry, at Grantee own expense, workers' compensation insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California. All of said insurance policies, or certificates thereof, shall be deposited by Grantee with the city Manager together with endorsements or statement from the insuring companies providing that such policies will not be subject to cancellation, modification or reduction of the limits of the policy until ninety (90) days after written notice to the City by registered or certified mail. Such policies shall guarantee payment of any final judgment rendered against Grantee or the City within the coverage provided, irrespective of the financial condition of, or any acts or omission of, said Grantee. All of said policies shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. - Grantee shall secure and deliver to the City Manager a twelve (12) month performance bond in the amount of $1,000,000 to secure the full, true and faithful performance of all their terms, obligations and condi tions of this franchise on the part of Grantee. Grantee shall present said bond together with a certificate from the surety showing payment in full for such bond, to the City Manager prior to the commencement of operations pursuant hereto and provide a one-year renewal and certificate f payment prior to the start of each year of this agreement. In the event of the termination or cancellation of the insurance or bond required hereunder or the failure of Grantee to provide such other insurance and/or bond as hereinabove provided, prior t the effective date of such cancellation or termination, this franchise may be suspended or terminated forthwith by City, by written notice thereof to Grantee. Any such suspension shall be for such period or periods as the City Manager from time to time may determine. No liability or obligation shall be incurred by City in favor of Grantee by virtue of any such notice r notices or from any such suspension or - 14 ~ 7-/(17 termination. In the event of such suspension or termination by City upon the failure of Grantee to secure and maintain on file said insurance and/or bond during the full term of this franchise, Grantee shall be liable for any and all damages suffered by City arising out of such suspension or termination. SECTION XI: section 8.23.110 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.110 Hold Harmless. Grantee of the franchise granted hereby shall indemnify, save and hold harmless, City and any officers and employees thereof against and from all damages, judgments, decrees, costs and expenditures which City, or such officer or employee, may suffer, or which may be recovered from, or obtainable against City, or such officers or employee, for, or by reason of, or growing out of or resulting from the exercising by Grantee of any or all of the rights or privileges granted hereby, or by reason of any act or acts of Grantee or its servants or agents in exercising the franchise granted hereby, and Grantee shall defend any suit that may be instituted against City I or any officer or employee thereof, by reason of or growing out of or resulting from the exercise by Grantee of any or all of the rights or privileges granted hereby, or by reason of any act or acts of Grantee, or its servants or agents, in exercising the franchise granted hereby. This hold harmless clause shall apply to any extension of the franchise. SECTION XII: That section 8.23.120 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.120 Obliqations of City. Except as hereinafter otherwise provided, Grantee shall have the sole right to pick up, gather, and remove refuse generated by residential, and commercial, or industrial property within the City except as otherwise provided in Section 8.24.080 of the Municipal Code and any other amendments thereto by the City until such time as this franchise is terminated as herein provided. City will not let any contract to, or enter into any contract with, any other person, firm, or corporation for the performance of the services herein required to be performed by Grantee, except as expressly otherwise herein provided, as long as this franchise is in effect. City shall protect Grantee's rights to such exclusive contract by proper ordinances, and by reasonable 15 ~7-J7 enforcement thereof. Grantee and Grantor hereby expressly except herefrom the picking up, gathering, and removal of refuse pursuant to a competitively bid contract between the Sweetwater Union High School District and an authorized City trash franchisee. - SECTION XIII: That section 8.23.130 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.130 Miscellaneous. The failure of either party at any time to require performance by the other of a provision hereof, shall in no way affect the right of such party entitled to performance to enforce the same thereafter. Nor shall the waiver of either party of any breach of any provisions hereof be construed to be a waiver of such provisions or of any succeeding breach thereof. Any notice that may be given to Grantee under or with respect to this franchise shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to Grantee or to an officer of Grantee, personally or when sent to Grantee by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to Grantee at: Laidlaw 881 Energy Way Chula Vista, Ca. 91911 - City reserves the right to determine, in the exercise of its powers to provide for the public health and welfare, whether technological or other changes materially affect the necessity of or level of the service provided for hereunder, and, in such case, the level of service hereunder shall be adjusted by City, and this franchise shall be reviewed and revised accordingly. Sec. XIV: That Section 8.23.140 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.140 Forfeiture. This franchise is granted upon each and every condition herein contained, and shall ever be strictly construed against Grantee. Nothing shall pass by the franchise granted hereby to Grantee unless it be granted in plain and unambiguous terms. Each of said conditions is a material and essential condition to be granting of the franchise. If Grantee shall fail, neglect or refuse to comply with any of the conditions of the franchise granted hereby, and if such failure, neglect or refusal - 16 f:$4i7-;8 shall continue for more than thirty (30) days after written demand by the City Manager for compliance therewith, then City, by the City Council, in addition to all rights and remedies allowed by law, thereupon my terminated the right, privilege and franchise granted in and by this ordinance, and all the rights, privileges and the franchise of Grantee granted hereby shall thereupon be at an end. Thereupon and immediately, Grantee shall surrender all rights and privileges in and to the franchise granted hereby. No provision herein made for the purpose of securing the enforcement of the terms and conditions of the franchise granted hereby shall be deemed an exclusive remedy or to afford the exclusive procedure for the enforcement of said terms and condi tions, but the remedies and procedure outlined herein or provided, including forfeiture, shall be deemed to be cumulative. SECTION XV: That section 8.23.150 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.150 Authoritv for Grant. Notwithstanding any other provision herein contained, this franchise is granted solely and exclusively under sections 1200, 1201, 1202, 1203, 1204, 1205 and 1206 of Article XII of the Charter of the City of Chula vista and no other authority. SECTION XVI: That section 8.23.160 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.260 Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective thirty days after its final passage unless suspended by a referendum petition filed as provided by law. SECTION XVII: That Section 8.23.170 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.170 Publication Costs. The Grantee of said franchise shall pay to the city a sum of money sufficient to reimburse it for all publication expenses incurred by it in connection with the granting thereof; such payment to be made wi thin thirty (30) days after the City shall have furnished such Grantee with a written statement of such expense. SECTION XVIII: That section 8.23.180 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: 17 ~ '--/1 Sec. 8.23.180 Written Acceptance. -- The franchise granted hereby shall not become effective until written acceptance thereof shall have been filed by the Grantee with the City Clerk. SECTION XIX: That section 8.23.190 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.190 Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Chula Vista Star News, a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in said city. SECTION XX: That section 8.23.200 is hereby added to the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.200 Special Events. Grantee agrees to cooperate with the City in carrying out special events to improve community appearance. SECTION XXI: That section 8.23.210 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.210 Residential Curbside Recvclinq Services - Grantee agrees to implement residential curbside recycling services to all single family homes as follows: A. Exclusivitv The City grants to Grantee the exclusive right to collect Recyclable Materials deposited at the curbside of single-family dwellings in such containers ("Designated Recycling container"; or alternatively (lIContainerll) as are herein required to be provided within the City limits, to include all residences receiving refuse collection and disposal services described in the following paragraph B. (1) . This does not exclude duly licensed non-profit organizations and community groups from conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds, nor does it exclude private individuals from selling or otherwise disposing of their own recyclable material. However, once materials have been placed at the curb in a Designated Recycling Container provided by the Grantee, the material (lIFranchised Recyclables") becomes one of the subject matters of this grant of franchise. - 18 /$:-2'tJ 7 - 2C) B. Obliqations of Grantee 1. Collection - Grantee shall collect and remove all Franchised Recyclables which are placed in a Designated Recycling container at the curbside on public streets, from all single-family residences. Grantee shall collect the Franchised Recyclables once each week, regardless of weather conditions. Collection will be on the same day of the week as the regularly scheduled trash collection day. Grantee and City will mutually agree to any changes in collection day. Grantee will notify residents of any changes in the collection day by distri~uting a flyer no later than two weeks prior to the affected day. 2. containers Grantee shall purchase and distribute recycling containers to be used by each eligible residential customer included in the program. The type and cost of container to be used, or changes of container type shall be approved by the City prior to purchase and distribution. Grantee shall retain ownership of the containers. Each residence eligible to participate in the program will receive one container. If Grantee determines that the volume of recyclable material exceeds the capacity of the one container, additional containers shall be provided at no cost to the resident. Replacement of containers that are stolen and/or damaged shall be made at no cost to the resident at Grantee's discretion. Grantee will be responsible for keeping records and making them available to the City regarding additional containers requested, and the reason for the request, e.g. damaged, stolen, needed to handle residence recyclables beyond capacity of one container. 3. Transportation of Materials - Grantee shall transport collected recyclable materials to a central collection point and shall retain responsibility for the sale of such materials in a timely and efficient manner, so as to yield the highest possible market value for the material. 4. Missed pick-Ups - In case of a missed pick-up called in by a resident, Grantee shall, where possible, provide collection within 24 hours. If unable to accommodate due to inadequate 19 ~7-~ notice, the materials shall be picked up on the next scheduled collection day and resident is to be so notified. Information on missed pick-ups shall be logged by Grantee and shall be available to the city. S. Public Awareness Proqram - The Grantee will prepare an Introductory Packet of information regarding the Citywide Single-Family Curbside Recycling Program, approved in advance by the City, and will distribute such packet with the recycling containers to each eligible residence. The packet shall include, but not be limited to: a) An informational brochure that details the program elements and describes how they can participate; and b) doorknob hangers or other methods encouraging use of the recycling container and explaining the program. -., The Grantee will assist with media events, make presentations to community groups and businesses on an as needed basis, and attend County wide meetings related to recycling, speaking on the City's Curbside Recycling Program if needed. The Grantee also agrees to assist in developing incentives to increase participation and tonnage collected, and to- encourage involvement of community and youth groups. The Grantee and the City agree that the main purpose of an aggressive public education program is to increase participation and diversion. Beginning in the second year, if, in the City's judgment, it is reasonably determined that the public education effort has not resulted in high enough program interest, the Grantee will perform reasonable public education activities at the City's direction at a cost not to exceed $.10 of the monthly billing. 6. Local Manager - The Grantee shall at all times during the term of this agreement have a local manager charged with the responsibility for supervision of the recycling operations and obligations of the Grantee. C. Obliqations of citv - The City shall have lead responsibility for directing the development and expendi tures of the Public Awareness Program as provided in paragraph B.(S). The City also agrees 20 ~-J2 7- ~ c..- ~ to take such steps as may be reasonably necessary to protect recyclable materials placed at the curbside for collection by Grantee under th~ terms of this Agreement and shall deliberate upon the merits of enacting and reasonably enforcing an anti~scavenging ordinance. D. Fundinq and Rates for Collection 1. Fundinq Sources The residential curbside collection program will be funded by four sources: a monthly recycling fee to all eligible residents; revenue from the sale of collected recyclable material; savings in disposal cost of material diverted from the landfill; and grant funds when available and awarded. (a) A monthly recycling fee charged to eligible residents is the primary source of funding for this program. In general, it will be allocated equally among the customer base receiving said recycling service and will be determined by the Grantee's operating expenses directly attributable to the recycling program, less: revenue received from the sale of collected recyclable material, the savings realized in disposal costs of material diverted from the landf ill, and application of grant funds. Specific fee information is outlined in paragraph D. (2) below. (b) All collected recyclable material will be sold at fair market value and revenues obtained from such sales shall be retained by Grantee as an offset against operating expenses. (c) Recyclable materials collected in the program will be diverted from disposal in the landfill, thereby resulting in a cost savings to Grantee ("Landfill Diversion Credit") . On a monthly basis, Grantee will determine the recycled material tonnage collected and the resulting Landfill Diversion Credit and will credit this savings during the first. year of operation as an offset against operating expenses. When reevaluating program costs in subsequent years, the City agrees to 21 ~ ?-:J-3 consider Landfill Diversion Credits of ~ less than 100%. The amount will be subject to negotiation and the intent is to provide an economic incentive for the Grantee towards increased participation and program success. 2. Cd) Any grant funds received will be applied to the costs of the program when award is noticed or during the next rate review procedure if the award takes place once a specific rate has been determined, with the intent of directly reducing the monthly fee to the homeowner. Rates for Collection - It is the City's intent to ensure that the rates charged to the citizens for the recycling program are appropriate and equitable. Based on experience gained in the City's pilot curbside and other recycling programs, the recycling fee for the first period of operations will be $1.10 per month, billed quarterly in the same manner as the trash collection fee. The monthly fee of $1.10 per residence will be the established fee for the period beginning February 1, 1991 through March 31, 1992. ..-" Specific rate review procedures will be prepared by the City and will be used with the concurrence of the Grantee in consideration of all requests for rate adjustments by the Grantee. Rate review will include adjustments for actual sale of materials and landfill diversion credits in previous period compared to original estimated amounts. Shortfalls or overages will be used in determining rates for upcoming periods. Rate review will be conducted annually beginning in January 1992, and will be concluded prior to the notification deadline for the 45 day notice of the annual CPI increase for refuse collection as referenced in Section 9 of the franchise as amended by Ordinance No. 2104, Rates for Collection. An increase in rates for recycling services will be subject to the same limitations and conditions for refuse collection rates listed in Section 9. By amending Chapter 8.24 of the Chulci Vista Municipal Code, the City may establish a program for preferential rates for senior ~ 22 ~ 7-Uf citizens or other classifications which are deemed to be in the public interest. The program parameters and rate structure will be determined by the City with the concurrence of the Grantee which concurrence shall not be unreasonably withheld. All changes to a preferential rat~ will be subject to the rate review and notification procedures referenced in this paragraph as well as the limitations and conditions for refuse collection rates listed in section of Ordinance No. 2104. E. Reports - Grantee shall file with the City written quarterly and annual reports of Grantee's performance under this agreement as follows: 1. Ouarterlv Pro;ect Reports - within fifteen (15) working days after the last day of each quarter, Grantee shall submit a quarterly project report to include but not be limited to the following: (a) Summaries of tonnage of all recyclable materials recovered, by material. (b) Summaries of tonnages of all recyclable materials sold, by material. (c) Market price for all recyclable materials collected from the curbside and sold by Grantee. The weight receipts shall be available for inspection by the city. (d) Resident participation rates in terms of weekly set-out counts. (e) Overall assessment of performance during the quarter. (f) Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in program operation. (g) Recommendations to increase tonnage of recyclable materials recovered. 2. Annual Report - On or before July 31 of each year of the term of this agreement, Grantee shall submit a fiscal year-end annual report to include but not be limited to the following: 23 ~7-~ (a) A collated summary of the information contained in the quarterly reports, and a summary of the participation rates and tonnages of recovered material. -, (b) A report of public awareness activities and their impact on participation and recovered volumes. (c) A report of highlights and other noteworthy experiences, measures taken to resolve problems, increase efficiency and household participation. (d) Additional information as necessary to meet state and/or Federal mandated reporting requirements. F. Performance Standards - This Agreement for curbside recycling services is subject to the performance standards and franchise conditions detailed in section 8.23.140 Forfeiture. While it is the intent of section 21 to describe specific recycling collection services to be provided by the Grantee in addition to existing refuse collection and disposal services, Grantee agrees that acceptable performance of recycling services will be considered severable from this agreement. - G. Additional Franchise Fee - The Grantee, as part of the consideration of this agreement, agrees to pay to the City an additional franchise fee at a rate consistent with that paid for refuse collection and detailed in Section 8.23.040 Consideration. This rate will begin at seven percent (7%) of the annual receipts collected by said Grantee within the City of Chula vista from residents for the recycling program within the City. Beginning April 1, 1991, the franchise fee shall be increased by one-half percent (1/2%) and one-half percent (1/2%) each April thereafter until it reaches a maximum of ten percent. It is understood that any increase in the franchise fee by the City shall be cause for the Grantee to increase charges in order to "pass through" the cost of the franchise fee. H. Term - It is the intent of the City that the term for the provision of Residential Curbside Recycling Services shall be to the year 2002, subject'to a two year notice of cancellation by the City without cause which cannot be tendered sooner than the end -, 24 ~ 7 -2,,, of the third year. The services remain cancelable for cause at any time. I. Recvclinq Proqram Expansion It is the City's intention to develop a comprehensive recycling program to reduce the amount of material being disposed of in County landfills and to comply with the mandates of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). Both parties hereby agree that the City may not go out to bid for the expansion of this recycling program to other land uses (e.g., multiple family, commercial, industrial) or other recyclable materials (e.g., yard waste, etc.) until after the City has met and conferred with Grantee with regard to its intent to do so. If separate amendments to the agreement for refuse collection and disposal are not negotiated between the City and the Grantee, the City may go out to separate bid. SECTION XXIII: That Section 8.23.230 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Residential Mul ti-famil v Recyclinq Services Sec. 8.23.220 Grantee shall provide Residential Recycling services to all Multi-family dwellings within the territory of the City as follows: A. Exclusivity - The City grants to Grantee, for the term herein specified and subject to such terminations herein allowed, the exclusive right to collect Residential Recyclables, excluding Yard Waste, deposi ted in Designated Recycling containers (or alternatively, "containers") located at Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location (s) as may be identified on each Multi-family residential parcel within the City. This grant of exclusive license is not intended and does not preclude duly licensed non-profit organizations and community groups from conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds, nor does it preclude a person from selling or otherwise disposing of their own Recyclables at a Buy-back Center or for donation, so long as said collection, donation or sale does not occur at the Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location. However, once the Residential Recyclables have been placed in the Designated Recycling containers provided by the Grantee, the material ("Franchised Recyclables") becomes one of the subj ect matters of this grant of franchise. The Grantee agrees to cooperate with the City in reaching a modification to this ordinance to the 25 ~7-:J-7 extent required by law at anytime it should be deemed necessary in the future. B. Obligations of Grantee 1. Implementation Schedule Grantee shall commence and diligently implement this franchise Citywide from the date of this franchise so that all mUlti-family residential complexes in the City have Recycling Collection service by October 1, 1993 in accordance with the City's mandatory recycling ordinance, Chapter 8.25 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 2. Collection - Grantee shall furnish said labor, services, materials and equipment required to perform this franchise. Grantee shall provide Collection and Removal services for all Franchised Recyclables subject to the provisions of this ordinance which are placed in Designated Recycling Containers at Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Locations, as defined by the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.25, segregated from Refuse, separated by commodity as outlined herein, from all MUlti-family residences. Grantee shall collect the Franchised Recyclables not less than once per week and provide any additional Collection as shall be necessary to prevent overflow of the Exterior Recycling Containers, regardless of weather conditions. Collection will be on regularly scheduled days as shall be arranged with the building property owner, manager or designated agent thereof. The Grantee and the City will mutually agree to any changes in Collection schedule frequencies or Removal Frequency. Grantee will notify the building property owner, manager or, designated agent thereof, of any changes in Collection day (s) by written notification no later than two weeks prior to the affected day, to be enforced nine months from the date of this ordinance. Design of Collection vehicles shall be done to limit the contamination and maximize the resale value of collected Franchised Recyclables. Any and all changes to the established means of Collection of Franchised Residential Recyclables, as herein outlined, shall be notified to the City in advance, including any changes in the way that the Franchised 26 ~f7-2~ - -- --- Residential Recyclables are collected (separated and/or commingled), design of vehicles, etc. 3. containers Grantee shall purchase and distribute Designated Recycling Containers, to include the following: a. Interior Recycling Containers. An appropriate Container to be used inside the Residential Unit, shall be provided to each eligible Residential customer included in the Multi-family Recycling program. The type of container to be used or changes of container type shall be approved by the City prior to purchase and distribution. Grantee shall retain ownership of the containers. Replacement of containers that are stolen and/or damaged shall be made at no cost to the resident at Grantee's discretion, up to one per unit. If a unit requires an additional Interior Recycling container beyond the maximum of two allowed, the property owner, manager or designated agent thereof, may purchase additional interior containers from the Grantee at a cost not to exceed the market price of the container and a reasonable handling charge. Grantee will be responsible for keeping records and making them available to the City regarding additional containers requested, and the reason for the request, e.g., damaged, stolen, needed to handle residence recyclables beyond capacity of one container, etc. b. Exterior Recycling containers. An appropriate Container(s) shall be provided for use at each Multi-family complex that meets the space restraints and Collection needs of the respective complex and the residents therein. Said containers may include 90 gallon carts on wheels, 2 cubic yard bin or 3 cubic yard bin. Each container shall conform to the following: slots in lids for placement of beverage containers (circular holes of appropriate sizes) and newspaper (narrow slots of appropriate size); plastic containers should include recycled plastic content; be fire resistent; be of durable quality and warranty; be heat stamped or labeled for commodity; be clearly labeled on the lids and the front facing of the bin, in Spanish and English (with graphics) as to the Designated Recyclable(s) and "No Trash"; be clearly labeled with the Grantee's name and phone number. 27 ~ 7-!> () Grantee agrees to provide to each MUlti-family complex at least one Exterior Recycling Container per complex for commingled hard recyclables (Aluminum cans, Glass Bottles and Jars, Plastic Bottles and Tin and Bi-Metal Cans) and one Exterior Recycling Container for Newspapers or alternatively at least one, 2- or 3- yard divided bin that effectively separates commingled hard recyclables from Newspapers. To the extent possible, Exterior Recycling Containers will be required to be placed adjacent to or near the Refuse Collection containers. 4. Transportation and Marketing of Franchised Recyclables Grantee shall transport collected Franchised Recyclables to a central collection and Processing point and shall retain responsibility for the sale of such materials in a timely and efficient manner, so as to yield the highest possible market value for the Franchised Recyclables as collected and in accordance with any Processing contract held by the Grantee. No noncontaminated Franchised Recyclables shall be Landfilled, unless approved by' the City. Should market failure occur for one or more material types, only the City Manager (or designee) of the City of Chula Vista may decide not to collect the affected material. All written contracts, if any, with processors, recyclers or other buyers of Franchised Recyclables shall be submitted to the City. Franchised Recyclables that are contaminated due to the placement of Refuse in a Designated Recycling Contai~er, or inclement weather that leaves the Franchised Recyclables unmarketable, may be landfilled. The Grantee shall retain a record of such occurrences and report said occurrences to the City on a quarterly basis. Should contamination occur more than twice at a single complex said complex shall be notified. Should contamination occur at a complex three or more times, the complex shall be notified and charged the necessary disposal fee for dumping the contaminated recyclables as Refuse at the Landfill. 5. Missed Pick-ups - In case of missed pick-up called in by a property manager, owner or designated agent thereof, Grantee shall, where possible, provide Collection within 24 hours. If unable to accommodate due to inadequate notice, the Franchised Recyclables shall be picked-up on the next scheduled collection day and the property manager is to be 28 ~6 7-3f!J _. - - notified. If the Designated Recycling Containers are overflowing or otherwise creating a Nuisance as a consequence of a missed pick-up, the Grantee is required to provide Collection within 48 hours of notification of missed pick-up. Information on missed pick-ups shall be logged by Grantee and shall be available to the City. 6. Public Awareness Program - The parties hereto agree to work diligently to formulate promotional plans and/or advertising to encourage Recycling in the city and thereby maximize the mutual benefits of this ordinance. The Grantee, in conjunction with the City, is responsible for promotion, education and outreach activities related to the program. The Grantee will prepare an Introductory packet of information regarding the Citywide Multi-family Recycling program and will distribute such packet with the Interior Recycling containers to each eligible residence. The packet shall include, but not be limited to: a) an informational notice, appropriate for hanging on refrigerator or other location indoors, that details all program elements, Recyclables to be collected, how residents can participate, use of the Interior Recycling container, proper placement of Recyclables in Exterior Recycling containers, the City's mandatory recycling ordinance and recycling hotline phone number; b) posters that can be placed in complex laundry rooms, pool areas and other public locations that explain the program, materials to be collected, description of program elements, the City's mandatory recycling ordinance and recycling hotline phone number. All promotional materials shall be developed with the City's Conservation Coordinator's or other designated City employee's advise and consultation, from the first step in development, through the final printing and distribution of materials. No materials shall be developed or distributed without the approval of the Conservation Coordinator or other designated City employee. All Introductory Materials shall be fully translated into Spanish, unless otherwise approved by the City. All subsequent materials shall be fully or at least partially translated into Spanish, unless otherwise approved by the City. All program materials shall utilize graphic representation of Designated Recyclables. 29 ~ 7 --~, -. The Grantee shall provide to the City a detailed outline of program promotional materials to be developed and outreach activities to be conducted in advance of program implementation. The Grantee will participate in communi ty and school outreach activities during the initial phase of program implementation and provide ongoing outreach activities, to include, but not be limited to, MUlti-family tenant and owner associations, community events, media events, make presentations to community groups and businesses on an as needed basis and as directed by the City, and atte~d County-wide meetings related to recycling, speaking on the City's Multi-family Recycling Program if needed and directed by the City. The Grantee also agrees to reasonably assist in developing incentives to increase participation and tonnage collected, and to encourage involvement of community and youth groups. The Grantee and the City agree that the main purpose of an aggressive public education program is to inc'rease participation and diversion, as well as limiting contamination of Franchised Recyclables. Beg inning in the second year, if, in the City's judgement, it is reasonably determined that the public education effort has not resulted in high enough Program interest, the Grantee will perform reasonable public education activities at the City's direction at a cost to the Grantee not to exceed $.10 per Unit per month. If needed, as part of the educational activities as determined by the City with input from the Grantee, the Grantee will develop incentives to increase participation, such as, offering rewards for complexes that have high participation levels and high tonnage levels. - The Grantee agrees to provide technical assistance to property owners, managers or designated agent thereof and work with the City to provide said technical assistance for Program design and implementation. The Grantee agrees to work with the City to provide ongoing Program monitoring services and quality control to prevent contamination of mater ials and encourage participation to property managers, to include on-site visitations, as deemed necessary by the Grantee and/or the City. The Grantee will' provide to the City a quarterly accounting of all outreach activities conducted during the previous quarter. The Grantee will also -. provide an accurate accounting of all costs 30 ~7-37..- associated with Program outreach, to include, but not be limited to, costs for designing of outreach materials, printing of outreach materials, etc. 7. Local Manager - The Grantee shall at all times during the term of this ordinance have a local manager charged wi th the responsibili ty for supervision of the recycling operations and obligations of the Grantee and agrees to provide, at a minimum, one (1), half-time person directly assigned to the Multi-family Recycling Program, whose duties are to include: promotional material development and distribution; program monitoring (including on-site visitations); educational outreach to school children; community outreach. 8. Anti-scavenging - The Grantee agrees to provide information to all property owners, managers or designated agents thereof regarding the City's anti- scavenging ordinance and how to report scavenging occurrences. The Grantee agrees to inform all of its employees of the City's anti-scavenging ordinance on a regular basis and how said employees shall report scavenging occurrences. C. obligations of the City - subject to the provisions of Paragraph B5 of this ordinance, the City shall have lead responsibility for directing the development and expenditures of the public awareness activities for the Multi-family Recycling Program. The city also agrees to take such steps as may be reasonably necessary to protect the Franchised Recyclables placed in the Designated Recycling Collection or storage containers placed in the Designated Recycling Collection Location(s) for collection by Grantee under the terms of this ordinance and shall reasonably enforce the City's anti-scavenging ordinance (CVMC, No. 2492). If during the initial period of the franchise, or any extension thereof, the City discontinues the separate collection of mUlti-family recyclables and reverts to a Mixed Waste Processing system for commingled collection of waste and recyclables, the City agrees to allow a rate adjustment to permit the Grantee to recover the loss incurred on the sale of vehicular equipment specifically purchased to meet the Grantees obligations under this ordinance. Such loss will be calculated by deducting the realizable market value of the equipment from the reasonably depreciated book value of the equipment at the time of the sale of equipment. 31 ~ 7-:J3 ~._ ..._..,.,__~~~,~__~'B._'_ D. Funding and Rates for Collection 1. Funding Sources - The Residential MUlti-family Recycling Program will be funded by four sources: a monthly recycling fee to all eligible residents (to be billed to the property manager or resident, as with refuse billings); Net revenues from the sale of collected recyclable material; savings in disposal cost of material diverted from the landfill; grant funds when available and awarded. a. A monthly recycling fee, charged to eligible residents is the primary source of funding for this program. In general, it will be allocated equally among the customer base, as determined by Section D.2 below, receiving said Recycling Collection services and will be determined by the Grantee's operating expenses directly attributable to the recycling program, less: revenues received from the sale of the collected Recyclables net of processing and brokering fees, the savings realized in disposal costs of material diverted from the landfill and any grant funds received for the program. b. All collected Recyclables will be sold at fair market value, as outlined in Section B.3 above, and net revenues obtained from such sales shall be retained by Grantee as an offset against operating expenses. The City shall be notified of significant changes in fair market values in writing as part of the quarterly reporting requirements. c. Recyclables collected in the Program will be diverted from disposal in the landfill, thereby resul ting in a cost savings to the Grantee ("Landfill Diversion Credit"). On a monthly basis, Grantee will determine the recycled material tonnage collected and the resulting Landfill Diversion Credit based on the landfill disposal cost approved by Council for refuse collection rates and will credit this savings during the first year of operation as an offset against operating expenses. When reevaluating program costs in subsequent years, the City agrees to consider Landfill Diversion Credits of less than 100 percent. The amount will be subject to negotiation and the intent is to provide an economic incentive for the Grantee 32 ~7~~ - .-" - towards increased participation and program success. d. Any grant funds received will be applied to the costs of the Program when award is noticed or during the next rate review procedure if the award takes place once a specific rate has been determined, with the intent of directly reducing the monthly fee to the rate payer. 2. Rates for Collection - it is the City's intent to ensure that the rates charged to the citizens for the Multi-family Recycling Program are appropriate and equitable. The monthly fee of $1.50 per unit will be the established fee for the period of July 1, 1993 through March 31, 1994, billed in the same manner as the refuse collection fee. Specific rate review procedures will be used by the City which are consistent with the procedures used for normal Refuse Collection. Rate review will consider adjustments for actual sale of Recyclables and Landfill Diversion Credits in previous period compared to original estimated amounts. Shortfalls or overages will be used in determining rates for upcoming periods. Rate review will be conducted as referenced in section 9 of the Franchise as amended, including the amendment created by Ordinance No. 2104, Rates for Collection. An increase in rates for MUlti-family Recycling services will be subject to the same limitations and conditions for Refuse Collection rates listed in section 9. E. Record Keeping and Reports Grantee agrees to accurately record collection data sufficient to comply with the reporting requirements delineated below and shall file with the City written quarterly and annual reports of Grantee's performance under this ordinance as follows: 1. Quarterly Program Reports - Within fifteen (15) working days after the last day of each quarter, Grantee shall submit a Quarterly Program report to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Tonnage summaries of all Franchised Recyclables Recovered, by material and including a revenue statement of all sales of Franchised Recyclables from the Program, by material. b. Market price for all Recyclables collected from the Multi-family Recycling Program and sold by 33 ~'7r?>5 - the Grantee and/or its processor assignee. The weight receipts and market value for material at the time sold shall be available for inspection by the city. c. Total number of customers served in the Program and resident participation rates in terms of an overall Program average. Any increases to the number of customers serviced shall also be reflected. d. Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in the Program operation, to include specifically contamination occurrences, listed by complex. Grantee agrees to monitor each complex at least once per year in order to reflect general participation by complex residents, contamination problems, other problems and assess need for additional public outreach activities. e. Report of all education and community outreach efforts conducted during the quarter. f. Overall assessment of performance during the quarter. - g. Recommendations to increase tonnage of Franchised Recyclable materials recovered. 2. Annual Report - On or before July 31 of each year of the term of this ordinance, Grantee shall submit a fiscal year-end annual report to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A collated summary of the information contained in the quarterly reports and a summary of the average overall Program participation rates and tonnages of recovered Franchised Recyclables. b. Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in the Program operation, measures taken to resolve problems, increase efficiency and Program participation. Number of complaints listed by type of complaint, i.e., missed pick-up, quality of service, etc., that occurred during the year. c. Report of all education and community outreach efforts conducted during the year and a discussion of their general impact on participation and recovered tonnages. -" 34 7,..~ ({I I~ d. Overall assessment of performance during the year. e. Recommendations to increase recyclable materials recovered. tonnage of f. Additional information state and/or Federal requirements. as necessary to meet mandated reporting F. Performance Standards This ordinance for Residential Multi-family Recycling services is subject to the performance standards and franchise conditions detailed in Section 14 Forfeiture of the franchise (ordinance NO. 1993). While it is the intent of Section 22 to describe specific Multi- family Recycling collection services to be provided by the Grantee in addition to existing refuse collection and disposal services, Grantee agrees that unacceptable performance of recycling services will be considered severable from its other obligations under the Franchise. Every reasonable effort must be made by the Grantee to maintain high levels of participation in order to reach the City's established diversion goals and assist in meeting the diversion standards set out in Assembly Bill 939 and the City and County's Mandatory Recycling Ordinances. G. Additional Franchise Fee - The Grantee, as part of the consideration of this ordinance, agrees to pay to the City an additional franchise fee at a rate consistent with that paid for refuse collection and detailed in Section 4 Consideration of the Franchise, as amended by Ordinance 2104. This rate will begin at eight percent (8%) of the annual Gross Receipts collected by said Grantee within the City of Chula Vista from residents for the MUlti-family Recycling Program within the City, and increase by one-half (1/2) percent in accordance with the refuse and single-family recycling franchise fee increases. However, said franchise fee increase must be approved by City Council. It is understood that any such increase in the franchise fee by the City shall be cause for the Grantee to increase charges in order to "pass through" the cost of the franchise fee. H. Term - it is the intent of the City that the term for the provision of Residential Multi-family Recycling Services shall be to the year 2002, 35 p;:4? 7'-37 subject to a two year notice of cancellation by the City without cause which cannot be tendered sooner than the end of the third year. The services remain cancelable for cause at any time. SECTION XXIV: That section 8.23.230 is hereby added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Sec. 8.23.230 Residential Yard Waste Recyclinq Services Grantee shall provide Yard Waste Recycling services to all Single-family Residences and those Multi-family dwellings not serviced by Curbside Collection or by landscapers who haul yard waste from the MUlti-family dwelling ("Specified Multi-Family"), on the following terms and conditions: A. Exclusivity - The City grants to Grantee, for the term herein specified and subject to such terminations herein allowed, the exclusive right to collect Yard Waste, deposited in Designated Yard Waste Recycling containers (or alternatively, "Containers") and/or bundles located at Designated Recycling Collection or storage Location(s) as may be identified for Single-family households and by Specif ied Multi-family dwellings. This grant of exclusive license is not intended and does not preclude duly licensed landscape contractors, non- profit organizations and community groups from conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds, nor does it preclude a person from selling or otherwise disposing of their own Yard Waste through a landscape contractor, self-haul or composting, so long as said collection, donation or sale does not occur at the Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location. However, once the Yard Waste has been placed in the Designated Recycling Containers or at a Designated Recycling Collection or Storage Location, the material ("Franchised Recyclables") becomes one of the subj ect matters of this grant of franchise. The Grantee agrees to cooperate with the City in reaching a modification to this Section to the extent required by law at anytime it should be deemed necessary in the future. B. Obliqations of Grantee 1. Imolementation Schedule Grantee shall commence and diligently implement this franchise Citywide from the date of this franchise so that all single-family residences and Specified MUlti-Family 36 ~73e -" - - residential complexes in the City have Yard Waste Recycling Collection service by December 1, 1993. 2. Collection - Grantee shall furnish said labor, services, materials and equipment required to perform this franchise. Grantee shail provide Collection and Removal services for all Yard Waste which is placed in Designated Recycling Containers or in bundles, at Designated Recycling Collection or storage Locations, as defined by the City of Chula vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.25, segregated from Refuse, from all Single-family and Specified Multi- Family residences. Grantee shall offer collection of Yard Waste not less than once per week and provide any additional Collection as shall be necessary to prevent overflow of the Exterior Recycling Containers at specified MUlti-family Residences. Collection will be on regularly scheduled Refuse Collection days or as negotiated wi th the City for Single-family residences and as shall be arranged with the building property owner, manager or designated agent thereof for Specified Multi-family complexes. The Grantee and the City will mutually agree to any changes in Collection schedule frequencies or Removal Frequency. Design of Collection vehicles shall be done to limit the contamination and maximize the salvageable value of the collected Yard Waste. Any and all changes to the established means of Collection of Franchised Residential Recyclables, as herein outlined, shall be notified to the city in advance. Acceptable materials for collection include all Yard Waste as herein defined, excluding palm fronds, treated or processed wood or lumber, Bulky Waste or any other materials as shall be determined by the City as to not be Salvageable. All acceptable Yard Waste shall be void of nails, wire, rocks, dirt or any other material that is not considered Yard Waste. 3. containers Grantee shall purchase and distribute, or otherwise arrange for the distribution of, Designated Recycling Containers, to include the following: a. Yard Waste Recycling container. A container on wheels (approximately 65 gallons) to be used for the collection of Yard Waste shall be offered to each eligible Residential customer for purchase or rent. Grantee shall distribute 37 ~7,g'f containers to all customers requesting use of said Containers. The type of Container to be used or changes of Container type shall be approved by the City prior to purchase and distribution. Grantee shall retain ownership of the containers unless the customer pays in full for the Container, as specified herein. -< Paper (kraft) or plastic bags will not be acceptable in the program, unless negotiated between the City and the Grantee. Properly bundled materials, such as tree limbs shall be included in the Collection, as herein defined. Acceptable bundles shall be no longer than four (4) feet in length, no more than eighteen (18) inches in diameter, or no heavier than forty (40) pounds. Bundles may be tied with string or twine only; no wire, plastic or other material may be used. Residents may provide their own "refuse" can-like Container for the purpose of storing the Yard Waste for Collection. This Container must be of the type acceptable by the City for the Collection of Refuse, in accordance with City ordinances. No container shall be more than 35 gallons in size and weigh more than fifty (50) pounds when used for storage of Yard Waste for Collection. All containers used for the storage of Yard Waste shall be kept so that operational performance allows for maximum hauler Collection efficiency. -< Grantee will be responsible for keeping records and making them available to the City regarding additional containers requested, and the reason for the request, e.g., damaged, stolen, etc. b. Exterior Recycling Containers. An appropriate Yard Waste Collection and storage Container(s) shall be provided for use at each MUlti-family complex that meets the space restraints and Collection needs of the respective complex and the residents therein. Said containers may include 90 gallon carts on wheels, 2 cubic yard bin or 3 cubic yard bin. Each container shall conform to the following: plastic containers should include recycled plastic content; be fire resistent; be of durable quality and warranty; be heat stamped or labeled for commodity; be clearly labeled on the lids and the front facing of the bin, in Spanish and English (with graphics) as to the - 38 ~1~f) Designated Recyclable (s) and "No Trash"; be clearly labeled with the Grantee's name and phone number. c. Compost bins. The Grantee agrees to offer Compost Bins to all residents. The Grantee shall arrange for a mechanism that allows for bins to be ordered through the Grantee and sold to residents at the bulk purchasing cost (including shipping and a reasonable handling and administration charge). Compost bin types to be considered should be sturdy and proven state-of-the-art compost design. The Grantee may choose to offer residents a choice of two different models, e. g., one "open composting system" and one "closed. " Bins should be composed of scrap waste wood and/or recycled plastic content. Residents shall be allowed to purchase the bins through an ordering system designed by the Grantee, with assistance from the City, that allows for wide distribution of the ordering mechanism (e.g., mail order coupons) to a majority of Chula Vista residents. The franchisee will work with the City to establish and implement the bin ordering system. The Grantee will work with the City to provide information to the residents on bin delivery and/or pick-up specifics, and on the use of the composting bins, once received. Bins may be dropped or shipped to a central location in the City for pick-up by residents from that site, provided residents are properly notified as to the pick-up point, or as an alternative bins may be delivered directly to residential dwellings. 4. Transportation and Marketinq of Franchised Recvclables Grantee shall transport collected Franchised Recyclables to a central collection and Processing point and shall retain responsibility of the materials, so as to yield the highest possible Salvageable value for the Franchised Recyclables as collected and in accordance with any Processing contract held by the Grantee. No noncontaminated Franchised Recyclables shall be Landfilled, unless approved by the City. Should the collected Yard Waste be unsalvageable, only the City Manager (or designee) of the City of Chula vista may decide not to collect the affected Yard Waste material. All written contracts, if any, with processors, 39 I~I ?-#/ recyclers or other brokers of Franchised Recyclables shall be submitted to the city. - Franchised Recyclables that are contaminated due to the placement of Refuse in a Designated Recycling Container, or inclement weather that leaves the Franchised Recyclables unsalvageable, may be landfilled. The Grantee shall retain a record of such occurrences and report said occurrences to the City on a quarterly basis. Should contamination of Franchised Recyclables occur at a Single-family or MUlti-family complex, said residence shall be notified. Should contamination occur three or more times, said residence shall be notified that they are in violation of CVMC Chapter 8.25 and that said residence in subject to penalties therein described. In order to allow for the Yard Waste Program to fully assist the City in meeting its AB 939 obligations, the City is interested in having the collected Yard Waste processed for compost or mulch (not biofuel). To this end, the City reserves the right to direct the Grantee to transport the collected materials to a duly permitted composting facility in the South Bay area, if it deems it to be in the best interest of the city. The City will_ negotiate with the Grantee to allow for the most equitable and beneficial processing of the collected yard waste. City staff will assist in the marketing of material to the extent practical and feasible. 5. Missed pick-ups - In case of missed pick-up called in by a Single-family Resident or Multi- family complex property manager, owner or designated agent'thereof, Grantee shall, where possible, provide Collection within 24 hours. If unable to accommodate due to inadequate notice, the Franchised Recyclables shall be picked-up on the next scheduled collection day and Single-family Resident or Multi- family complex owner, property manager or designated agent thereof is to be notified. If the Designated Recycling containers are overflowing or otherwise creating a Nuisance as a consequence of a missed pick-up, the Grantee is required to provide Collection within 48 hours of notification of missed pick-up. Information on missed pick-ups shall be logged by Grantee and shall be available to the City. 6. Public Awareness P'roqram - The parties hereto agree to work diligently to formulate promotional - 40 p;4i 7-<t'z... plans and/or advertising to encourage Recycling in the city and thereby maximize the mutual benefits of this ordinance. The Grantee, in conjunction with the city, is responsible for promotion, education and outreach activities related to the program. The Grantee will prepare an introductory packet of information regarding the Citywide Yard Waste Recycling program and will distribute such packet to each eligible residence and Specified Multi-family complex owners, property managers or designated agent thereof. The packet shall include, but not be limited to: a) an informational notice, appropriate for hanging on refrigerator or other location indoors, that details all program elements, how residents can participate, proper placement of Yard Waste in containers or Bundles, the City's mandatory recycling ordinance and recycling hotline phone number; and, b) a general information brochure on composting; A "pay as you go" sticker designed with a tear-off portion to allow the Yard Waste Collection driver to remove the tear-off portion once the materials are collected shall also be made available to Program participants. The Grantee, with assistance from the City, shall arrange for distribution of the stickers through at least two retail outlets, the Grantee's business location, and other locations, as necessary, to be negotiated. All promotional materials shall be developed with the City's Conservation Coordinator's or other designated City employee's advise and consultation, from the first step in development, through the final printing and distribution of materials. No materials shall be developed or distributed without the approval of the Conservation Coordinator or other designated City employee. All Introductory Materials shall be fully translated into Spanish, unless otherwise approved by the City. All subsequent materials shall be fully or at least partially translated into spanish, unless otherwise approved by the City. All program materials shall utilize graphic representation of Designated Recyclables. The franchisee will be required to distribute the City's composting guide (upon resident request) and other City developed yard waste related informational materials; the City will provide copies of guides and City developed materials at no cost to the negotiated franchisee. 41 ~7~ The Grantee shall provide to the City a detailed outline of program promotional materials to be developed and outreach activities to be conducted in advance of program implementation. The Grantee will participate in community and school outreach activities during the initial phase of program implementation and provide ongoing outreach activities, to include, community events, media events, make presentations to community groups and businesses on an as needed basis and as directed by the City, and attend County-wide meetings related to recycling, speaking on the City's Yard Waste Recycling Program if needed and directed by the City. The Grantee also agrees to reasonably assist in developing incentives to increase participation and tonnage collected, and to encourage involvement of community and youth groups. All such Yard Waste Program outreach may be conducted in conjunction with the other franchised Recycling programs, upon approval by the city. The Grantee and the City agree that the main purpose of an aggressive publ ic education program is to increase participation and diversion, as well as limi ting contamination of Franchised Recyclables. Beginning in the second year, if, in the City's judgement, it is reasonably determined that the public education effort has not resulted in high enough Program interest, the Grantee will perform reasonable public education activities at the City's direction at a cost to the Grantee to be agreed upon by the City and added to the cost of the Program fee, not to exceed $ . 10 per Unit per month. If needed, as part of the educational activities as determined by the City with input from the Grantee, the Grantee will develop incentives to increase participation, such as, offering rewards for program participants that have high participation levels and high tonnage levels. The Grantee agrees to work with the City to provide ongoing Program monitoring services and quality control to prevent contamination of materials and encourage participation to property managers, to include on-site visitations, as deemed necessary by the Grantee and/or the city. The Grantee will provide to the City a quarterly accounting of all outreach activities conducted during the previous quarter. The Grantee will also provide an accurate accounting of all costs associated with Program outreach, to include, but 42 ~ 7-o/~ --. .-. ~ not be limited to, costs for designing of outreach materials, printing of outreach materials, etc. 7. Local Manaqer - The Grantee shall at all times during the term of this ordinance have a local manager charged with the responsibility for supervision of the recycling operations and obligations of the Grantee and agrees to provide, at a minimum, one (1), quarter-time person directly assigned to the Yard Waste Program, whose duties are to include: promotional material development and distribution; program monitoring (including on-site visitations) ; educational outreach to school children; community outreach and reporting duties. 8. Anti-scavenqinq - The Grantee agrees to provide information to all property owners, managers or designated agents there of regarding the City's anti-scavenging ordinance and how to report scavenging occurrences. The Grantee agrees to inform all of its employees of the City's anti- scavenging ordinance on a regular basis and how said employees shall report scavenging occurrences. C. Obliqations of the city - Subject to the provisions of Paragraph B5 of this ordinance, the City shall have lead responsibility for directing the development and expenditures of the public awareness activities for the Yard Waste Recycling Program. The City agrees to reasonably enforce all Program specifications. This includes the following: that single-family residents and MUlti-family complexes are allowed to place up to five containers (to be no more than 35 gallons in size each) and/or bundles at the Designated Collection Location per "pay-as-you- go" sticker; the ci ty' s mandatory recycling ordinance requirements as they pertain to Yard Waste and as described herein; and, Yard Waste container specifications. If during the initial period of the franchise, or any extension thereof, the City discontinues the separate collection of mUlti-family recyclables and reverts to a Mixed Waste Processing system for commingled collection of waste and recyclables, the City agrees to allow a rate adjustment to permit the Grantee to recover the loss incurred on the sale of vehicular equipment specifically purchased to meet the Grantees obligations under this ordinance. Such loss will be calculated by deducting the realizable market value of the equipment from the reasonably 43 ~7-~~ -. depreciated book value of the equipment at the time of the sale of equipment. D. Fundinq and Rates for Collection 1. Fundinq Sources - The Residential Yard Waste Recycling Program will be funded by four sources: a monthly recycling fee to all eligible residents (to be billed to the property manager or resident, as with refuse billings); Net revenues from the sale of collected Yard Waste material, at such time as the market provides revenues for Yard Waste; savings in disposal cost of material diverted from the landfill; grant funds when available and awarded. a. A monthly recycling fee, charged to eligible residents is the primary source of funding for this program. In general, it will be allocated equally among the customer base, as determined by Section 0.2 below, receiving said Recycling Collection services and will be determined by the Grantee's operating expenses directly attributable to the recycling program, less: any such revenue that shall be received from the sale of the collected Recyclables at such time that the market allows, the savings realized in disposal costs of material diverted from the landfill and any grant funds received for the program. - b. All collected Recyclables will be marketed at fair salvageable value, as outlined in section B.3 above, and any such net revenues as shall be obtained from such sales shall be retained by Grantee as an offset against operating expenses. The City shall be notified of significant changes in fair salvageable values in writing as part of the quarterly reporting requirements. c. Recyclables collected in the Program will be diverted from disposal in the landfill, thereby resul ting in a cost savings to the Grantee ("Landfill Diversion Credit"). On a monthly basis, Grantee will determine the recycled material tonnage collected and the resulting Landfill Diversion Credit based on the landfill disposal cost approved by Council for refuse collection rates and will credit this savings during the first year of operation as an offset against operating expenses. When reevaluating program costs in subsequent years, the City -, 44 ~ 7~" agrees to consider Landfill Diversion Credits of less than 100 percent. The amount will be subj ect to negotiation and the intent is to provide an economic incentive for the Grantee towards increased participation and program success. d. Any grant funds received will be applied to the costs of the Program when award is noticed or during the next rate review procedure if the award takes place once a specific rate has been determined, wi th the intent of directly reducing the monthly fee to the rate payer. 2. Rates for Collection - It is the City's intent to ensure that the rates charged to the citizens for the Yard Waste Recycling Program are appropriate and equitable. The City hereby establishes the following fees and charges for Residential Yard waste services, based on using the service, using the service with a resident's own container, or using the service with a Laidlaw-provided container, either rented or purchased. These fees and charges are subject to change by the Council by resolution from time to time as the Council determines necessary. The Council directs that the below listed fees and charges shall be placed in the City's Master Fee Schedule, and any amendments hereto shall be by resolution amending said Master Fee Schedule: Optional Service Levels. Each Item below is in the alternative: 1. Charge if Resident is Not Using System* $0.00 2. Subscription Services, Monthly Fee with Rental A. For Laidlaw container Rental $1.00 B. For Weekly Collection Services*** Total Monthly Fee for Services with Rental $2.00** $3.00 3 . Subscription Services, Purchase of container. Monthly Fee with A. For Weekly Collection Services*** . . . . . . . . . . $2.00 B. One-Time Laidlaw container Purchase Price. . . . . . . . . . $50.00-$70.00* 4. Pay-As-You Go Services, Sticker Purchases 45 ~7-;; A. For 5 cans or bundles per sticker $1.00 -, Notes to Service Charges * Requires composting of yardwaste (consistent with rules and regulations for composting in Sections 8.25.040 and 8.25.090) or self-haul. Yardwaste may no longer be put in regular trash. ** Purchase of Laidlaw Container Required If Resident Desires Not to Rent Laidlaw Container. See Item 3 Below. *** Service price entitles Resident to put out weekly 1 Laidlaw container (65 gal) and up to 6 bundles in addition to the Laidlaw container. Specific rate review procedures will be used by the City which are consistent with the procedures used for normal Refuse Collection. Council intends to provide annual reviews of the aforementioned fees and charges, and currently intends that same shall occur on or about May 31st of each year. Rate review will consider adjustments for actual sale of Recyclables and Landfill Diversion Credits in previous period compared to original estimated amounts. Shortfalls or overages will be used in determining rates for upcoming periods. Rate review will be conducted as referenced in Section 9 of the Franchise as amended, including the amendment created by Ordinance No. 2104, Rates for Collection. An increase in rates for Yard Waste Recycling services will be subject to the same limitations and condi tions for Refuse Collection rates listed in section 9. -.., E. Record Keepinq and Reports Grantee agrees to accurately record collection data sufficient to comply with the reporting requirements delineated below and shall file with the City written quarterly and annual reports of Grantee's performance under this ordinance as follows: 1. Quarterly Program Reports - Within fifteen (15) working days after the last day of each quarter, Grantee shall submit a Quarterly Program report to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Tonnage summary of all Franchised Recyclables Recovered, by material and including a revenue -, 46 \~-Lf!J statement of all sales of Franchised Recyclables from the Program, by material. b. Salvageable value for all Recyclables collected from the Yard Waste Recycling Program by the Grantee and/or its processor assignee. The weight receipts and salvageable value for material at the time processed shall be available for inspection by the city. c. Total number of customers served in the Program and resident participation rates in terms of an overall Program average. Any increases to the number of customers serviced shall also be reflected. d. Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in the Program operation, to include specifically contamination occurrences, listed by Residence. Grantee agrees to monitor Program participation to ref lect general participation by residents, contamination problems, other problems and assess need for additional public outreach activities. e. Report of all education and community outreach efforts conducted during the quarter. f. Overall assessment of performance during the quarter. g. Recommendations to increase tonnage of Franchised Recyclable materials recovered. 2. Annual Report - On or before July 31 of each year of the term of this ordinance, Grantee shall submit a fiscal year-end annual report to include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A collated summary of the information contained in the quarterly reports and a summary of the average overall Program participation rates and tonnages of recovered Franchised Recyclables. b. Discussion of problems and noteworthy experiences in the Program operation, measures taken to resolve problems, increase efficiency and Program participation. Number of complaints listed by type of complaint, i.e., missed pick-up, quality of service, etc., that occurred during the year. 47 ~7~f c. Report of all education and community outreach efforts conducted during the year and a discussion of their general impact on participation and recovered tonnages. ~ d. Overall assessment of performance during the year. e. Recommendations to increase recyclable materials recovered. tonnage of f. Addi tional information state and/or Federal requirements. as necessary to meet mandated reporting F. Performance standards This ordinance for Residential Yard Waste Recycling services is subject to the performance standards and franchise conditions detailed in Section 14 Forfeiture of the franchise (ordinance No. 1993). While it is the intent of Section 23 to describe specific Yard Waste collection services to be provided by the Grantee in addition to existing refuse collection and disposal services, Grantee agrees that unacceptable performance of recycling services will be considered severable from its other obligations under the Franchise. ~, Every reasonable effort must be made by the Grantee to maintain high levels of participation in order to reach the City's established diversion goals and assist in meeting the diversion standards set out in Assembly Bill 939 and the City and County's Mandatory Recycling Ordinances. G. Additional Franchise Fee - The Grantee, as part of the consideration of this ordinance, agrees to pay to the City an additional franchise fee at a rate consistent wi th that paid for refuse collection and detailed in section 4 Consideration of the Franchise, as amended by Ordinance 2104. This rate will be set at eight percent (8%) of the annual Gross Receipts collected by said Grantee within the city of Chula vista from residents for the Yard Waste Recycling Program within the City unless increased by resolution of the City Council. It is understood that any such increase in the franchise fee by the City shall be cause for the Grantee to increase charges in order to "pass through" the cost of the franchise fee. H. Term - it is the intent of the City that the term for the provision of Residential Yard Waste Recycling Services shall be to and until October 21, 2002, subject, -" 48 p& 7-~'" however, to the right of the City to cancel same upon gi ving a two year notice of cancellation by the City without cause which cannot be tendered sooner than the end of the third year from the date of the adoption of the ordinance enacting this Section. The services remain cancelable for cause at any time. SECTION XXI: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. y F: \homelanomeylchap823C 49 ~ 7-Jj ~ TInS PAGE BLANK - - ~7-~ Item No. 8 Date 9/21/93 8. RESOLUTION 17253 ADOPTING COUNCIL POLICY 900-01 ENTITLED "DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO RELEASE PROPERTY FROM AND CONSENT TO TRANSFER OR ASSIGNMENT OR RIGHTS UNDER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS" staff has requested that the item be continued one week to the September 28, 1993 meeting. ~*' / COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: ITEM ~ MEETING DATE 9/21/93 Resolution J? .25'1 accepting California State Library - California Library Services Act, Families For Literacy grant funds awarded to the Chula Vista Literacy Team, appropriating funds, and amending FY 1993-94 budget to include .78 FTE positions. SUBMITTED BY: Library Director~, REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~~(4/5ths Vote: YES l NO _) The Chula Vista Literacy Team has been awarded a California Library Services Act Families For Literacy grant from the California State Library to develop and offer special family literacy services to adult learners and their young children. This is the third year that the Literacy Team has been awarded this grant. These funds cannot be used to supplant the current tutor reading program. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution accepting the Families For Literacy grant funds, appropriating funds, and amending FY 1993-94 budget to include .78 FTE positions. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On May 26, 1993 the Library Board of Trustees voted to support the Library's application for CLSA Families For Literacy grant funds. (See Attachment A.) DISCUSSION: On June 9th, 1993, the City Council ratified the Library's application for Families For Literacy grant funds. Our original request was for $27,511, however budget constraints forced the State Library to limit the award to $23,000. The Chula Vista Literacy Team has offered family literacy programming for the past two years. The Family Reading Program was developed to break the intergenerational cycle of illiteracy by providing in-service training for volunteer tutors whose learners are parents of young children, special library programming for those learners and their families, and a home collection of quality children's books and magazines for each participating family. The program is directed by a .35 FAMILY LITERACY COORDINATOR and involves partnerships with South Bay Head Start, Chula Vista Elementary School District's Even Start program, and with the Parent Education Department of Sweetwater Union High School District. The grant also includes a .38 Clerical Aid and a .05 Children's Library Associate. FISCAL IMP ACT: $23,000 will be received to implement this program through the Chula Vista Literacy Team. These funds will be appropriated into fund 216-2163. (See Attachment B.) / ATTACHMENTS 9-1 f/ - 2- NOT SCANNED RESOLUTION NO. I 7'" 5'l/ :r 1'E/'7 9 G~f(E'TE]) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY SERVICES ACT, FAMILIES FOR LITERACY GRANT FUNDS AWARDED TO THE CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AMENDING THE FY 1993-94 BUDGET TO INCLUDE .78 FTE POSITIONS WHEREAS, the Chula vista Literacy Team has been awarded a California Library Services Act Families For Literacy grant from the California State Library to develop and offer special family literacy services to adult learners and their young children; and WHEREAS, this is the third year that the Literacy Team has been awarded this grant and the funds cannot be used to supplant the current tutor reading program; and WHEREAS, on May 26, 1993, the Library Board of Trustees voted to support the Library'S application for CLSA Families for Literacy grant funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby accept the California State Library Services Act, Families for Literacy grant funds awarded to the Chula vista Literacy Team. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $23,000 is hereby appropriated from the California Library Services Act Fund into Fund 216-2163, and the FY 1993-94 budget is amended to include .78 FTE positions, as follows: 5105 - Hourly Wages .35 FTE Family Literacy Coordinator .38c FTE Clerical .05 FTE Children's Library Associate 5143 - Medicare 5145 - PARS 5218 - Postage 5221 - Travel, Conferences & Meetings 5301 - Office Supplies 5319 - Family Literacy Resources $19,687 286 39 88 200 500 1. 500 $23,000 David Palmer, Library Director Approved as to form by Bru!: B~~~ Attorney Presented by C:\rs\c1sa 9-.3 ~~q ATTACHMENT A MINUTES LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES MAY 26, 1993 LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM 3 : 3 0 PM BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Alexander, Vice Chair Viesca, Trustees Donovan, Lathers, Wilson, BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Trustee Williams (Excused) CITY STAFF PRESENT: Acting Library Director Palmer Betty Roche,' Robert Coye OTHERS PRESENT: I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of April 28, 1993 MSC That the minutes of the April 28, 1993 meeting be approved as mailed. (Donovan/Williams, 3-0-2, Viesca and Williams absent) II. CONTINUED MATTERS A. SOUTH CHULA VISTA LIBRARY Acting Director Palmer reported that the Design Review Commi tte~ had approved the South Chula Vista Library plans. Richard Hall, Library Bond Act Coordinator, will visit Chula Vista on June 3rd to look at the lighting fixtures that are proposed for the building and to check on design modifications for the Children's story hour room. The fountain in the courtyard off the cafe has also being modified so that water will no longer run through a channel, but flow into a 30" tall pool filled with cobble stones. The water level will be approximately 6" deep. On April 28, the Planning Commission approved the conditional use permit for the South Chula vista Library. During the course of their discussion, one of the commissioners voiced his concern about graffiti and proposed placing a fence around the library with gates across the driveways to prevent use of the parking lot during closed hours. In response to his concerns, the Planning commission requested that staff draft a letter to the City Council listing these concerns. MSC (Wilson/Donovan) the Library Board supports the recommendation to keep the South Chula vista Library open to publ ic access without a fence. (3 -0-2 Viesca and Williams absent) P 9-~ LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 2 - MAY 26, 1993 - Trustee Lathers remarked that fencing the new library would issue a challenge to taggers and vandals. Mr. Palmer also reported that Ricardo Legorreta and Marshall Brown will make a presentation at the City Council workshop on Thursday, May 29th at 4:00 pm in the Council Conference room. The issue of fencing the site will be addressed. Council will be asked to approve the design as the Library must move forward so that the bid package could be prepared and distributed by mid July. Mr. Palmer asked any members of the Board who could attend this workshop to lend their support. Frances Reeves, Vice President of the Friends, will be there to represent the Friends of the Library who are very supportive of this project. B. EASTLAKE LIBRARY The School District's approval of the contract has been delayed, but should be approved at their meeting on May 27th. The Library will try to open this facility by August 2nd. An official grand opening will be held on August 7th or the 14th. Mr. Palmer asked the Board to mark their calendars to keep these dates open. ...-.,.. C. LIBRARY BUDGET The City Manager has presented a balanced budget to the City Council, contingent upon the State not cutting City revenue. When the State finalizes its budget and makes its cuts to City revenue, the cuts lists that had been previously distributed to the Trustees will be used by the City Manager as a basis to make the necessary budget adjustments. Council will review the budget at a meeting later this evening. The Library Board budget will be reviewed on June 3rd at 6 pm. Chairman Alexander offered unused travel funds from the Trustee's budget for staff to attend ALA. MSC (Donovan/Wilson) The Library Board seeks approval to turn over the Library Board travel monies for this year to be utilized by Library personnel. (3-0-2 Viesca/williams absent) - ~9-~ LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 3 - MAY 26, 1993 D. FINAL LIBRARY ADA TRANSITION PLAN Acting Director Palmer reported that were no changes to the draft ADA Transition Plan previously distributed to the Trustees. MSC (Wilson/Donovan) The Board approves the library staff developed plan to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act as submitted in its final form. (3-0-2 Viesca/Williams absent) Mr. Palmer alerted the Trustees about a recent staff interaction with a disabled patron. III. NEW BUSINESS A. LIBRARY NAMES Acting Director Palmer reported that the City Manager recommended that the Library Board propose a permanent name for the South Chula Vista Library. The City Manager further suggested that an information item be sent to the City Council for a final determination. In September 1990 the Library Board voted to recommend the name the South Chula Vista Library. At their December 5, 1990 meeting, after an appeal by members of the Montgomery Planning Committee, the Trustees voted to rescind their original recommendation of the South Chula vista Library and instead support the name the Daniel M. Pass Memorial Library. (Vice Chair Viesca arrived at 4:34 pm) At a previous meeting, Trustees voted to recommend that the building at 365 F Street be called the Civic Center Library. MSC (Viesca/Wilson) the Library Board recommends that the new library at Fourth and Orange Avenues be called the South Chula Vista Library (4-0-1, Williams absent) B. CHULA VISTA HERITAGE MUSEUM - STATEMENT OF COOPERATION This item was continued to the next meeting. Jfl ~-7 LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 4 - MAY 26, 1993 IV. LIBRARY DIRECTOR'S REPORT - A. FUNDING FOR LITERACY Trustees received information on the Library's application to the State Library to continue Families for Literacy funding through the coming year. This grant application will continue a popular program in which 1 i teracy staff works with both the learner and their children, to break the cycle of illiteracy. This has been one of the most successful and popular programs the Literacy Project maintains. Grant funds are used to buy books and pay the coordinat~r's salary. MSC (WilsonjViesca) that the Library Board supports the Literacy Teams application for the Families for Literacy grant. (4-0-1, Williams absent) Acting Director Palmer reported that the Literacy Team receives an Adult Basic Education (ABE) grant each year to be used for staff development. This year Literacy Coordinator, Meg Schofield, will use this grant to attend a five week workshop on dyslexia. This program accepts only 10 applicants each summer and is specifically geared to teach educators how to identify individuals with dyslexia: and offers appropriate tutoring techniques. Although this is a large commitment of time on the part of the Library and the Literacy Team, the Library feels that this program is critical because of the large number of individuals with dyslexia seeking help from the Literacy Team. - Acting Director Palmer publicly thanked Trustee Williams for attending the City Council meeting to support CDBG funding for the Literacy Team. Council approved the staff recommendation of $40,000 for the Literacy Program. B. LIBRARY DIRECTOR POSITION Acting Director Palmer reported that he is among the four candidates who will attend a half-day assessment center to select a Library Director. C. STAFF TRAINING Acting Director Palmer reported that the Library staff is receiving training in: sexual harassment; gangs and violence; emergency Spanish language training for desk staff; Spanish language classes (Spanish 101); budget; W9---r LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 5 - MAY 26, 1993 drug awareness and employee assistance referral; sensitivity to disabled patrons and voice mail. D. MASTER FEE SCHEDULE This material was distributed in the Library Board's packet. E. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The South Chula vista Library is the City's maj or capital improvement proj ect this year according to the City Manager. The Rancho Del Rey Library has been tentatively scheduled for FY 1996-7. Other library related projects include the third year payment for the Inlex system, and reroofing of the Library. This material was included in the Trustees packet. V. COMMUNICATIONS A. FRIENDS Betty Roche reported that the pencil machine earned $255 during its first 3 months of operation. The book store collected over $2,200 for the month of April. The Friends of the Library will again sponsor book grants in the amount of $250 for employees going back to school. Volunteers are receiving sensitivity training for patrons with a disability. B. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Coye asked if the Library had considered taking a terminal from the civic Center Library to the EastLake facility if equipment ordered for the EastLake Library is not received in time. Mr. Palmer replied that this had been considered, and that staff terminals would be moved before public terminals. Mr. Coye also discussed the possibility of a police substation in the South Chula Vista Library. C. WRITTEN COMMENTS None. D. BOARD COMMENTS Trustee Lathers - Announced her opposition to a police substation in the new building. In her opinion, the same type of police activity at the Civic Center Library would (57 I-I LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 6 - MAY 26, 1993 be adequate for the South Chula Vista Library. She also reported that ',she is graduating the year and will attend UCSD to study engineering. Vice Chair Viesca asked if anyone attended Legislative Day. Acting Director Palmer reported that no one attended this year from Chula Vista. Trustee Wilson - Thinks staff training is terrific and vital to a staff with high public contact. She also commended Mr. Palmer for the amount of time and energy he dedicates to the Library. . Trustee Donovan - Reported that the Genealogy Society donated $1,000 to the Library. These funds are ear- marked for the purchase of genealogy books. Acting Director Palmer reported that the Chula Vista Medical Group donated $500 to the Museum. Chairman Alexander reported that the next Library Board meeting will be at the Castle Park branch at 6: 00 pm. He also offered his thanks to Ron Williams for his support of the Literacy Team at the Council meeting. t - VI. ADJOURNMENT - THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5: 15 PM. THE NEXT LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING WILL BE HELD ON JUNE 24, 1993 AT 6:00 PM AT THE CASTLE PARK LIBRARY. - w ;-/0 ATTACHMENT B FAMILIES FOR LITERACY BUDGET FY 1993-94 8/24/93 BUDGET ACCOUNT: 216-2163 5105 - Hourly Wages: .35 FIE Family Literacy Coordinator .38c FIE Clerical Aid .05 FTE Children's Library Associate $19,687. 5143 - Medicare $286. $39. $88. $200. $500. $1,500. $23,000. 5145 - PARS 5218 - Postage 5224- Training 5301 - Office/Program Supplies: 5319 - Family Literacy Resources: TOTAL: P J--J/ ITEM TITLE: ITEM / t) MEETING DATE 9/21/93 Resolution I 7.25'>accepting Federal Department of Education, Library Services and Construction Act Title VI Library Literacy Program grant funds awarded to the Chula Vista Literacy Team, appropriating funds, and amending the FY 1993-94 budget to include a .36 FTE position. SUBMITIED BY: Library Director 0(i? ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ '01 /':3 (4/5ths Vote: YES L- NO_) The Chula Vista Public Library has been awarded $34,845 in grant funds for the Federal fiscal year 1993-94, under Title VI of the Library Services and Construction Act, Library Literacy Program. We are currently recipients of a $32,800 Title VI grant, whose cycle ends September 30, 1993. These grant funds cannot be used to supplant the current tutor reading program. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution accepting Federal Department of Education, Library Services and Construction Act Title VI Library Literacy Program grant funds awarded to the Chula Vista Literacy Team, appropriating funds, and amending the FY 1993-94 budget to include a .36 FTE position. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On January 27, 1993 the Library Board of Trustees voted to support this Title VI grant application. (ATTACHMENT A.) DISCUSSION: On February 2, 1993, the City Council ratified the Library's application for LSCA Title VI grant funds. They will be used to continue our Model Writing Project for Adult Learners. A variety of small group writing classes for learners enrolled in the Chula Vista Literacy Team will be taught at the Library at 365 F Street, and at the Castle Park/Otay Library. All of the classes will serve as a training ground for volunteer tutors to improve their techniques for teaching basic writing skills. A .36 FTE WRITING INSTRUCTOR will be hired to work throughout the grant period, October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1994. FISCAL IMPACT: These funds cannot be used to supplant the existing tutor reading program, however $11,184 in salaries and $3,945 in benefits budgeted in the Title VI grant are available to offset general funds for the Chula Vista Literacy Team Coordinator and Administrative Office Assistant II. Funds will be appropriated into fund 260-2610. (See Attachment B.) Id"'iIO~J. ATTACHMENTS NOT SCANNED RESOLUTION NO. 17.25; RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, LIBRARY SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACT TITLE VI LIBRARY LITERACY PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS AWARDED TO THE CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AMENDING THE FY 1993-94 BUDGET TO INCLUDE A .36 FTE POSITIONS WHEREAS, the Chula vista Public Library has been awarded $34,845 in grant funds for the Federal fiscal year 1993-94, under Title VI of the Library Services and Construction Act, Library Literacy Program to continue the Model Writing Project for Adult Learners; and WHEREAS, the Library is currently a recipient of a $32,800 Title VI grant, whose cycle ends September 30, 1993 which funds cannot be used to supplant the current tutor reading program; and WHEREAS, on January 27, 1993, the Library Board of Trustees voted to support the Title VI grant application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby accept the Federal Department of Education, Library Services and Construction Act, Title VI Librarv Literacy Proqram grant funds awarded to the Chula vista Literacy Team. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $34,845 is hereby appropriated from the California Library Services Act Fund into Fund 260-2613 and the FY 1993-94 budget is amended to include a .36 FTE position, as set forth in Attachment B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. Presented by (terIs i ~ruce M. Bo Attorney David Palmer, Library Director C:lrslTitleVI 1".,3 ~\O ATTACHMENT A MINUTES LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES JANUARY 27, 1993 LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM 3:30 PM BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Alexander, Vice Chair Viesca, Trustees Donovan, Wilson, Williams, Ex- officio Member Lathers BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None CITY STAFF PRESENT: Acting Library Director Palmer, Deputy City Manager Jim Thomson OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Coye, Jim Ellis, John Mattox, Betty Roche, John Rojas Chairman Alexander asked that the agenda be reordered to allow John Rojas, President of the Chula vista Historical Society, an opportunity to speak. Mr. Rojas offered his personal invitation to the Trustees to attend the reception for the Chula vista Heritage Museum on Saturday, January 30th. The reception will be provided by the Friends of the Chula Vista Public Library from 1 - 3 pm. He thanked the Library for its participation in making the Museum a reality. (Trustee Williams arrived at this time) I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of December 9, 1992 MSUC (DonovanjViesca) that the minutes of the December 9, 1992 meeting be approved as mailed. The following three items were taken out of order. II. CONTINUED MATTERS C. South Chula vista Library Since the last Trustees meeting the schematic designs had been sent to the State Library for review. Because these plans differed from the ones submitted in the grant application and a different architectural firm had been selected to design the building, a formal process to amend the grant application was required before the State could officially review them. Bond Act Manager, Richard Hall, met with Library staff on January 15th to discuss the State Librarian's concerns regarding the furnishings plan. His suggestions were incorporated into new plans which were resubmitted to the State Library on January 21st. Mr. Hall has requested v.if /IJ--S .1" LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 2 - JANUARY 27, 1993 - further changes which are currently being incorporated into new plans which will be sent to the State when completed. After approval of the schematic plans by the State Library, the staff will proceed to design development. The revised site plan, floor plan and a color working model of the building were presented to the Board. The Trustees were asked for their comments on the schematic plans and model. vice Chair Viesca asked if the plans provided for a second story or lower level addition. Councilman Rindone had also asked about a second story. Based upon the service area in the grant application, the State requires that the plans provide for a future expansion of 10,000 square feet in order to meet future needs. The grant application is fairly rigid. Because the Library had submitted plans for a one story building, adding additional levels at this time would require the Library to reapply for the grant. Also by industry standards, it's difficult to justify the cost of designing and building a second story when adequate areas for expansion are available at ground level. - Acting Director Palmer reported that the State Library requires that all furnishings and book stacks in the building program be purchased prior to the opening of the library. However, all furnishings need not all be in place at that time. This is important because the Library's total materials collection represents a build- out of several years and won't be available when the Library first opens. Trustee Williams questioned the architects as to how they planned to deal with graffiti. Mr. Mattox replied that graffiti resistant materials and paint would be used in conjunction with plantings that would make the application of graffiti difficult. Chairman Alexander was concerned about signage, both on the City streets approaching the library and on the site. Trustee Donovan she had expected more color. Acting Director Palmer briefly reported on the project time schedules. Before the design development phase can officially begin, the State Library'S must approve the schematic plans. The design development phase, which would include lighting, signage, mechanical/electrical ~,(J)- J OJ -- ? LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 3 - JANUARY 27, 1993 design, is estimated to take one month. By mid-April work should begin on the working or construction drawings which are scheduled to be completed by July 1st. According to the grant guidelines, the construction award must be let by the end of August. The Library's goal is to make this August 30th deadline. Both Richard Hall and the State Librarian feel this is an exciting project. In addition to the requirements set by the State, the city of Chula vista has a Design Review and Conditional Use Permit Process. The Design Review Committee reviewed the current plans on January 25th. The City Council will review the color model and site plans at 4: 00 pm on January 28th with a Town Meeting later that evening for communi ty input on the color. The conditional use permit process requires review by the Montgomery Planning Commission, the Planning Commission and finally the City Council. These formal meetings are planned to occur at the end of February or early March with Council approval expected around the beginning or middle of April. The Library is in the process of hiring a project manager and negotiations with the firm selected should begin soon. III. NEW BUSINESS E. Literacy Title VI Application Acting Director Palmer asked that the Trustees support the Literacy Team's application for FY 1993-94 Title VI Grant funds. This grant would continue the successful writing program which was started this year with a similar Title VI grant. In addition, if funded, the grant will help defray the Literacy Team's staff expenses from the City's general fund. MSUC (Williams/Donovan) The Library Board of Trustees supports the Literacy Teams application for Title VI funds. The Trustees also sent their appreciation to the staff for applying for this grant. W J& ~ 7 '. LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 4 - JANUARY 27, 1993 - D. Trustee to serve on selection committee for Library Director MSUC (ViescajWilliams) serve on the selection Director. that Chairman Alexander would committee for a new Library MSUC (Viescajwilliams) that Trustee Donovan would serve as an alternate on the selection committee. II. CONTINUED ITEMS A. Library Budget The Library has requested $ 3, 372,890 for next year's base budget. Funds from sources other than the General Fund; grants, EastLake Development funds, and AV insurance fees were subtracted from the base budget to calculate the two, five and ten percent cuts requested to accompany the budget application. The Library staff developed the following goals and priorities in preparing the budget and the cuts for FY 1993-94: - 1. To provide optimal service to the public during a period of decreasing budgets and increasing service outlets. 2. Maintain book and library materials budget at current or appropriate proportional levels. 3. Find new efficiencies to handle continued increase in circulation and library usage. 4. Meet scheduled August 30, 1993 ground breaking for South Chula Vista Library as well as other construction related deadlines 5. Develop measurable criteria for evaluation of service at EastLake High School. 6. Develop appropriate service and management plans in anticipation of the FY 1994-95 opening of the South Chula Vista Library. 7. Explore new revenue sources, including establishment of a Library Foundation. Acting Library Director Palmer asked the Board if they concurred with these goals and priorities. There was general consensus on the goals as presented. Trustee Donovan suggested Sue Miller be contacted to help contact potential donors and help with the establishment of a Foundation. Acting Library Director Palmer said that ~ Yf1 Jf) /g/ LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 5 - JANUARY 27, 1993 Mrs. Miller has previously indicated her willingness to assist in this manner. The Library is requesting two supplemental budget items: additional book money, and a Principal Librarian for the South Chula Vista Library to help with furnishing plans, book selection and community outreach. Budget cuts were discussed in the budget transmittal memo mailed in the Trustee's packet. Trustee Donovan expressed concern of the size of the library materials cut. A loss of 10% would result in a 31% reduction in the materials budget. (Trustee Wilson left at this time) Mr. Palmer relayed that as terrible as these cuts might be, Chula Vista is in much better financial condition than many other cities. Other libraries have had to face drastic reductions in materials and staff budgets. B. Library Board Budget Copies of the Library Board's budget were mailed with the Trustee's packets. There were no questions. III. NEW BUSINESS A. Town Meeting regarding South Chula vista Library January 28, 1993 Trustees were notified of the Council Workshop at 4:00 p.m. Thursday, January 28th, prior to the Town Meeting at the Otay Community Center. Acting Director Palmer informed the Trustees that Ricardo Legorreta would not be able to attend these meetings, but Miguel Almarez would speak in his place. B. Americans with Disabilities Act requirements This item was covered in the in the Director's letter to the Trustees along with additional back-up information. C. CALTAC 1993 Regional Workshops in Library Leadership This item was covered in the Library Board package. j?Y J/J-; LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 6 - JANUARY 27, 1993 - IV. LIBRARY DIRECTOR'S REPORT A. EastLake High School/Public Library Update-Contract Copies of the draft contract between the City of Chula vista and the Sweetwater Union High School District were distributed for Trustees to review. Staff hopes to begin operation in this facility at the end of April. EastLake High School will begin year-round classes starting in July 1993. B. Museum reception-opening This item discussed previously. V. COMMUNICATIONS A. Friends Betty Roche, reported that: -The bookstore made $26,449 in 1992. -The Friends are hosting the museum reception. -The Friends annual meeting was well attended. Retiring Director, Rosemary Lane, was given a lifetime membership to the Friends of the Library in honor of her service to the Community. - B. Public Comments Mr. Coye made several suggestions regarding directional signage for the new library in addition to suggesting that an electronic sign be included on the grounds to alert passers-by of upcoming library programs. C. Written Comments - None D. Board Comments Vice Chairman, viesca welcomed Joanna Lathers' addition to the Library Board. Trustee Donovan was delighted to see the working model of the new Library, but felt the colors had been toned down. Chairman, Alexander, commended Acting Director Palmer on the excellent job he is doing. He also expressed his regrets regarding Rosemary Lane's retirement, and sent his best wishes. - kH' jj)-/[J LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES - 7 - JANUARY 27, 1993 VI. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adj ourned at 5: 46 pm. The next Library Board of Trustees meeting will be held on February 24, 1993. COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act, requests individuals who require special accommodation to access, attend and/or participate in a City meeting, activity or service request such accommodation at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact JoAnn Howard for information or your request at (619) 691-5193. California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired. _pi} jtl/ II ATTACHMENT B LSCA TITLE VI BUDGET FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 ........., October 1, 1993 - September 30, 1994 BUDGET ACCOUNT 260-2613 5101 Salaries (Reimburse General Fund) $11,184. .15 FTE Literacy Coordinator $5,634. .33 FTE Administrative Assistant II $5,550. 5105 Hourly Wages $18,000. .36 FTE Writing Instructor 5141 Retirement (Reimburse General Fund) $1,669. .15 Literacy Coordinator $854. .33 Administrative Assistant II $815. 5142 Employee Benefit Plan (Reimburse General Fund) $2,150. .15 Literacy Coordinator $845. .33 Administrative Assistant II $1305. 5143 Medicare $387. Literacy Coordinator (Reimburse General Fund) $46. - Administative Assistant II (Reimb. Gen. Fund) $80. Writing Instructor $261. 5145 PARS (Writing Instructor) $675. 5225 Transportation Allowance $80. 5298 Other Contractual $300. 5301 Supplies $200. 5321 Instructional Resources $200. TOTAL: $34,845. - pi;r/c-/~ CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item~ Meeting Date 9/21/93 .......t, ITEM TITLE: Resolution 17,2~ Waiving immaterial defect, Accepting bids and awarding contract for the construction of the City Attorney's office expansion in the City of Chula Vista, CA ) SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~ f REVIEWED BY, City Manager j(,,~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO At 2:00 p.m. on September 1, 1993, in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received six sealed bids for the construction of the City Attorney's Office Expansion in the City of Chula Vista, CA. Of the six bids, the bid from the Augustine Company was found to be the lowest bid. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council Adopt the resolution waiving immaterial defect, accepting bids and awarding contract to the Augustine Co. in the amount of $ 100,417.00. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Funds for the construction of the office expansion were included in the FY 1992-93 CIP Project Budget (GG-141). The work to be done include office addition, remodeling work, landscaping and irrigation system. Environmental Status The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is categorically exempt under Section 15301,class 1 "Existing Facilities" of the California Environmental Quality Act. Prevailing Wage Statement The source of funding for this project is the General Fund Capital Outlay. No prevailing wage requirements were necessary or a part of the bid documents. Compliance with Federal and State Minority and Women owned business requirements was unapplicable on this project. However, the project was advertised with several DBE publications per the City's outreach policy. It should be noted that even though DBE requirements were unapplicable to this project, three MBE sub-contractors were included in the Augustine Company's bid. These sub-contractors are South Coast Landscaping, Choctaw Construction, and Rojo Construction. Bid Results On the bid opening date, bids were received from Six contractors as follows in order of the lowest base bid first: / /., J Page 2, Item I J Meeting Date 9/21/93 CONTRACTOR Base Bid Result 1. The Augustine Company, Encinitas. $ 100,417.00 2. 1. Fife Construction., San Diego. $ 106,702.00 3. Woodburn Construction Co., EI Cajon $ 108,798.00 4. Adams Builders, Inc. Chula Vista. $ 110,242.00 5. Famania Construction Co., San Diego $ 120,523.00 6. Grahovac Construction co., San Diego $ 123,775.00 The low bid received from The Augustine Company is below the Engineer's estimate of $109,350.00 by $ 8933.00 or 8.2%. The Augustine Company has not done work for the City in the past, however, they have sufficient experience and good past references. They have extensive experience in the construction of office buildings and commercial facilities in California and Arizona. Staff contacted three references given by the Augustine Company and all rated them from good to excellent (see attached reference list). We have reviewed the low bid and recommend awarding the contract to The Augustine Company. The low bidder made several last minute changes to his bid before submitting it to the city. These changes were entered in the proposal in figures instead of words and they amount to reduction in the total bid by $4886.00 (see Exhibit A). The Augustine Company would remain the low bidder with or without these changes. Staff recommends that council waive this irregularity in the Augustine's bid and find it immaterial based on the following: 1. Unit prices written in words are needed in case of disparity between the sum prices shown in figures and words. In case of disparity, unit prices in words shall prevail and take precedence. In this case, the disparity between written prices and figures prices did not provide an advantage to the low bidder. Also, the low bidder later submitted written clarification confirming his bid figures prices. 2. Council has the right to waive immaterial defects in the bid documents. Attached is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: FUND REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION 1. Contract Amount $ 100,417.00 2. Contingencies (approx. 15%) $ 15,814.65 3. Inspection Staff (approx. 6%) $ 6,583.00 TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $ 122,814.65 1/-- .2. Page 3, Item II Meeting Date 9/21/93 FUND REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION 1. General Fund, 600-600 1-GG 141 $ 122,814.65 TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $ 122,814.65 FISCAL IMP ACT: After construction, only routine City maintenance amounting mainly to cleaning and landscape maintenance will be required. Attachments: 1) Bidder's Disclosure Statement NOT SCANNw 2) Bid~e: Reference List NOTSI"'A lUlto.'rED 3) ExhIbIt A \.41L'l.n SA: JA-050 WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\attomey.a13 JI-3/1I-1f RESOLUTION NO. J7A5{, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING IMMATERIAL DEFECT, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EXPANSION IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA. WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on September 1, 1993, in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received the following six sealed bids for the construction of the City Attorney's Office Expansion in the City of Chula Vista, CA.: CONTRACTOR Base Bid Result 1. The Augustine Company, Encinitas. $ 100,417.00 2. J. Fife Construction., San Diego. $ 106,702.00 3. Woodburn Construction Co., El Cajon $ 108,798.00 4. Adams Builders, Inc. Chula Vista. $ 110,242.00 5. Famania Construction Co., San Diego $ 120,523.00 6. Grahovac Construction co., San Diego $ 123,775.00 WHEREAS,'the low bid received from The Augustine Company is below the Engineer's estimate of $109,350.00 by $ 8933.00 or 8.2% and The Augustine Company has not done work for the city in the past; and WHEREAS, however, they have sufficient experience and good references; and WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is categorically exempt under Section 15301, class 1 "Existing Facilities" of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is the General Fund Capital Outlay and no prevailing wage requirements are necessary or a part of the bid documents. Compliance with Federal and State Minority and Women owned business requirements was unapplicable on this project; and WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the low bid and recommend awarding the contract to The Augustine Company; and WHEREAS, the low bidder made several last minute changes to his bid before submitting it to the city which changes were 1 /I,f THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests. payments. or campaign (contributions. on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council. Planning Commission, and "all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the contract, e. g.. owner, applicant. contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. None 2. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership. list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. N/A 3. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. N/A " 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No..lL If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. None Date: ~()pj"()mb()Jr 1, 1993 -~. 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contribute current or preceding election period? Yes_ NoL If yes, s whic Signatur of contractor/applicant Rob eJU: L. AuqMune, P /tu-i.deYL-t /1 7 Print or type name of contractor/applicant - THE AUGUSTINE COMPANY . Person is defined as: "Any indivitblal, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, a~sociation, social club, fraltmal organiwtion, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city wwnicipality, district, or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting a~ a unit. " z: '0 -l :J c:c -l <( ~ u.J Z u.J lJ 531 ENClNITAS BOULEVARD, SUITE 11i81 SEP -7 AM 10= 32 ENClNITAS, CA 92024 1 , Se.ptembeJt 2, 1993 CLty 06 Chu1.a. V-iAta CLty Eng-ine.eJt PubLic. SeJtv-ic.e..6 Bu.-i.i.cling 276 founth Ave.nue. Chu1.a. V-iAta, CA 91911 Attn: Alex Al-Agha Sub j : CLty Attonne.y'.6 066-ic.e. Ex..pan.6-ion GG-141 G e.ntleme.n: PuMuant to yoUlt ne.qUe..6t 60n ne.6eJte.nc.e..6, we. 066eJt the. 60Uow-ing: Roy Stue.b-ingeJt, V-ic.e. PJte..6-ide.nt Ca.U60nn-ta. f e.deJLa.l Bank. 5700 Will h-tJte. Blvd. Lo.6 Ange.le..6, Ca 90036 213-932-4098 Ka C. K,i.Jtby State. f aJUn I n.6 U/ta.nc.e. 3333 Hyland Ave.nue. CO.6ta Me..6a., CA 92626 714-241-2993 Randall Hall N o/tth C oa.-6t Mana.g em e.nt 531 Enc.-tn-ita.6 Blvd., suae. 113 SanV-ie.go, CA 92024 619-436-0916 ( Al.6o, we. a.Jte. e.nc.to.6-ing a c.opy 06 oUlt ContJtac.t-tng Ex..pe..tt-ie.nc.e. H-ighUght.6. Should you Jte.qu-iJte. add-tt,i.ona.l -in6oJtmat-ton, ple.a.-6e. c.onta. he. undeJt.6-igne.d. _-f::::.. RLA:c.Jt TEl. (619) 634-2438 · FAX (619) 634-2439 lie. #615362 I. , II" .8" -- .-.,^,,_._.~,.y.-~-'" THE AUGUSTINE COMPANY CONTRACTING EXEERIENCE lllGHLlGHTS: Hnnvv Hunter Restaurant. Scottsdale. AZ Owned by Vicorp Specialty Restaurants, Inc. Contract Value: $320,000.00 Hnnvv Hunter Restaurants. Phoenix & Tempe. AZ Owned by Vicorp Specialty Restaurants, Inc. Contract Value: $126,000.00 American Express Build;n, "B". Builtmore Fashion Square Mall Scottsdale. AZ Owned by American Express Company Contract Value: $107,916.00 Peoria Admi.Distration Center Owned by Peoria School District #11 Contract Value: $2,645,000.00 ADP Site Preparation Owned by the V A. Medical Center Contract Value: $95,000.00 Replace Lab Casework Owned by the V A. Medical Center Contract Value: $224,475.00 Police and Public Safety Build;ni Owned by the City of Phoenix Contract Value: $210,782.00 Munitions Build;n, Luke Air Force Base. AZ Owned by the U. S. Government Contract Value: $177,368.00 Build;na 932. Luke Air Force Base. AZ Owned by the U. S. Government Contract Value: $78,687.00 Gordo's Mexican Restaurant. Park Central Mall. Phoenix. AZ Owned by Santa Fe Food Services, Inc. Contract Value: $62,610.00 Dunbar-Whittier Elementary Schools Owned by the Phoenix Elementary School District #1 Contract Value: $1,056,743.00 Rio Salado Postal Facility Renovation Owned by the U .S.P .S. Support Services Facility Contract Value: $1,634,000.00 /1-' 1 , ~ THE AUGUSTINE COMPANY !;oN"I:MCTING E~ER1ENCE HlG1U.IGHTS (CONI'D) OrouD Livina: Faci1itie.l Owned by the Arizona Department of Economic Security Contract Value: $1,842,097.00 police & Public Safetv Built\ina owned by the City of phoenix Contract Value: $749,600.00 Bllnkv'S Restaurant. Paradise valley Mall phoenix.. AZ. Owned by Don LeGate Contract Value: $155,000.00 california Federal BAnk.. El Toro. CA owned by California Federal Bank Contract Value: $85,000.00 Bank construction Contacts: Daniel T. Reza, Vice President Union Bank 14500 Roscoe Blvd. Panorama City, CA 91402 818-895-4447 Roy Stuebinger, Vice President California Federal Bank 5700 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90036 213-932-2116 Mary Ellen Watson, CFO GrosSDlont Bank Corporate Office 7777 Alvarado Road, Suite 501 La Mesa, CA 91941 619-589-6061 1/' 10 ........,. ....., - ....... ,........' entered in the proposal in figures instead of words and they amount to reduction in the total bid by $4886.00; and WHEREAS, staff recommends that council waive this irregularity in the Augustine's bid and find it immaterial based on the following: 1. unit prices written in words are needed in case of disparity between the sum prices shown in figures and words. In case of disparity, unit prices in words shall prevail and take precedence. In this case, the disparity between written prices and figures prices did not provide an advantage to the low bidder. Also, the low bidder later submitted written clarification confirming his bid figures prices. 2. Council has the right to waive immaterial defects in the bid documents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby waive the immaterial defect, and accept the six bids, and award the contract to The Augustine Company in the amount of $100,417.00, to be completed in accordance with the specifications approved by the Director of Public Works. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said contract for and on behalf of the City of Chula vis as;t :D Presented by John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works Bruce M. Attorney F: \home\attomey\atty .bid 2 1/-- ~ / /I "If) EXHIBIT IIAII BID PROPOSAL To the Honorable Mayor and City Council of the City of Chula Vista. The undersigned declares that he has carefully examined the plans and specifications for: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EXPANSION (GG-141 ) -- and that he has examined the location of the proposed work and has read the accompanying instructions to bidders, and hereby proposes to furnish all materials, and do all the work required to complete the said work in accordance with said plans, specifications, and Special Provisions for the unit price or lump sum set forth in the following schedule. The contractor has SIXTY (60) working days to complete the project. APPROXIMATE ITEMS WITH UNIT PRICE ITEM QUANTITIES WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE IN FIGURES TOTAL -, 1. LUMP SUN CITY ATTORNEY'S EXPANSION AND OTHER REM02&!::ING ITEMS _ CO~PLETE ~ .0fP~.! ,~~~~t(r- ~ -..-rr.: ~-- / :AM' ir..J $:fj~ LUMP SUM L. . 68/10 ~ ~ $ 9~ IV..! - 2. LUMP SUM LANDSCAPING, COMPLETE .-li ~.l/.H~~$ ~It~/ LUMP SUM L.:.S. ./ $ ~&M 3. LUMP SUM IRRIGATION, COMPLETE 1rll.1-' ~/, ~~ {?~1/ LUMP SUM ~ L.S; (,U ,.. ~o ~~ /c~-911" ~,L fA- ~ ~ ~ GRAND TOTAL: $ I () oS; Y/;1:" M-5'/~ - $ ~1~7 , /1-'1/ . .. Proposal (Continued) The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required contract, with necessary bonds, within the ten (10) working days after having received notice that the contract is ready for signature, the proceeds of the check or bond accompanying his bid shall become the property of the City of Chula Vista. Signature of bidder: providingJor the registration of Contractors, License Expiration Date 3/31/94 a si Ication B - Ge..nVta.l.. BtU..tcU.na ContJr.a.c.tO!l. Licensed in accordance with License No. 638749 Contractor's State Lic nse _-t- RobeM L. AuglL6 ne.., P!l.uwe..n.:t (If an individual, so state. If a firm or co-partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individuals, co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, also names of President, Secretary, Treasurer and Manager thereof, and affix the Corporate Seal thereto.) The.. AuglL6une.. .CompaYl1f Rob eM L. AualL6une... P !l.u.-tde..n.:t, CEO Audne..y L. AuglL6une.., Se..CJte.:taJz..y, T !l.e..a.6une..n Dated: Se..pte..mbe..n 1 , 19~ 531 Enc[~ Blvd., Su-tte.. 118 Enc[~, CA. 92024 (Business Address) 619-634-2438 (Phone Number) TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 33-0492574 (C\CONTRACncV A TORNY .16) 11"'/';" . The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor, required to be listed by the provisions in Section, "Subcontracting", of the special provisions, to whom the Bidder proposes to subcontract portions of the work. LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS SHEET 1 OF 2 Name & Address (City)' -- Description (Type) of Portion of Work Subcontracted :\ lty Choctaw, . Ramona\,]" . Sae CleaJtinq/ Ex.cava.u.o n ~~~~ South ColUt LancL6cape, Chu1.a. V-L6ta. L ancL6 capinq South ColUt LancL6 cape. Chu1.a. V-L6ta. Vuu..qa.u.o n JFJ, El Cajon Co ncJte.:te v~~;.: f ~J;N IG V~ 57.IJ ~ I.A ~~ CaJtpentJur Millwo/tk Rain P/tOOh, Lak~ide Roo6ing Window,!:' So. w~t Pl/UteJtinq, Fa.llb/took EnundIU Gl/U/.:, La;th& . P l/UteJt Roj o. V-L6ta. Gyp/':'um Wa.llboaJtd Ac.olL6uc.a.l C~ng G. A. Rodgvu" San Viego CommeJtiUa.-t FWtn-Lbht9/.:" sv ~ Floo/t CoveJting 1 ntvu,ta..te, Ramo na. P a.in;t-tnq ~tl ~'pml);t'tla ~15fP.ol., A A~ ~~~r.u. Plumbinq M ec.Mnic.a.l Champion Elec.tnic., San Viego Elec.tnic.a.l 1/,/3 . ( LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS (CON'T.) SHEET 2 OF 2 Name & Address (City)' Description (Type) of Portion of Work Subcontracted Commencial Window Cov~ng~, LA -- MiM Blin~ \ OF BIDDER: The. AuglL6une. Compa.ny -:- C, TITLE: P Jtuide.n:t une. 'Contractor is obligated to provide complete address and phone numbers of subcontractors prior to award of contract. IC:\CONTRACT\CV A TORNY .16) //-/1 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item I ~ SUBMITTED BY: Meeting Date 9/21/93 Resolution I? )..5' '? Accepting bids and awarding contract for "Resurfacing of Lorna Verde Swimming Pool with Fiberglass in the City of Chula Vista, CA (PR-145)" Director of Public Works ~ Director of Parks and Recreation~ City Manager...JGl *(J ~j C (4/5ths Vote: Yes_Nox.) ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: At 2:00 p.m. on July 28, 1993, in Conference Room 3 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Resurfacing of Lorna Verde Swimming Pool with Fiberglass in the City of Chula Vista, CA (PR-145)". The work to be done includes furnishing and installing all materials and providing all necessary labor to complete resurfacing of the Lorna Verde Swimming Pool with a new fiberglass surface. Associated with this new surface is the installation of some new tile work and lane lines, and the replacement of pool and deck hardware. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Waive minor irregularity in low bid of lack of bidding on additive item. 2. Accept bids and award contract to Derek Downey Pool and Spa in the amount of $48,950. In additive, authorize the expenditure of $13,889.00 for the additive bid item. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Funds for the replastering of pool at Lorna Verde were included in the 1991-92 budget (PR- 145). The project was included in the budget because the pool sides and bottom have cracks and rough surfaces. If replastering is not done, the pool interior will eventually be irreparably damaged. Because of the highly technical nature of swimming pool construction, staff hired the firm of Aquatic Consulting Services to prepare the bid documents for the resurfacing project. The consultant recommended that rather than replastering the pool to install a fiberglass liner. The fiberglass coating has several advantages over a plastered surface. These advantages are listed below: 1. Fiberglass is much more resistant to stains, discoloration, and the growth of algae, than a plastered surface. /,)-/ Page 2, Item /.2.. Meeting Date 9/21/93 2. Fiberglass may result in a reduced chemical costs, since materials are less likely to adhere to its dense and non-porous surface, requiring oxidation by chlorine rather than by mechanical removal through filtration. 3. In the unlikely event of structural movement, fiberglass is slightly more flexible than plaster, and repairs to the fiberglass surface are relatively simple. 4. Fiberglass is much more resistant to chemicals, and will not react like plaster in the case of a accidental chemical imbalance. 5. Fiberglass companies are willing to warranty their work for 15 years or more. Typical warranties for plastered surfaces are from one to two years in length. Because the work of fiberglassing a pool is very specialized in nature, a pre-bid conference was held with various contractors so they would have an opportunity to review the site and look at the work that needed to be done to the pool. Only a few contractors attended this pre-bid conference. All together only six contractors took out specifications for bidding this project. Staff anticipated receiving approximately three bids for doing the work. However, only one bid was received. The bid received was from Derek Downey Pool and Spa and was for $48,950, and is below the engineer's estimate of $63,000 by $14,050 or 22.3%. The low bid by Derek Downey Pool and Spa had a minor irregularity. The irregularity involved failure by the contractor to provide the City a bid price for additional bid item. The bid specifications stated the following: "The contract will be based on a base bid alone, # 1-8 listed above under ' Summary of Work to be Done'. If funds are available, City may elect to construct the additive item. The contractor shall provide a bid for the additive item on the proposal. " Since the contract is being awarded on the base bid, irrespective of what the contractor bid for the additive item, this can be construed as a minor irregularity. The Council by approving this resolution will be waiving this minor irregularity in the bid. Although the bidder did not submit a quote for the additive items, originally, he subsequently provided this quote (see attached letter). The additive item includes the replacement of the following deck and pool hardware items: 1. main drain grates at the bottom of the pool 2. gutter grates around the waterline perimeter of the pool 3. return inlets or "headers" (points along the bottom of the pool where chemically treated and filtered water is returned to the pool) 4. safety handrails and rail anchors in the shallow stairway area of the pool Staff and the Consultant, with Aquatic Consulting Services has reviewed the references and the additive bid item submitted by the low bidder. The references were found to be satisfactory and the price for the additive bid to be fair and equitable. Therefore, staff concurs that the City award the contract to Derek Downey Pool and Spa for the base bid along with additional funds for the construction of the additive item. J.2. - .2.. Page 3, Item 1,3.. Meeting Date 9/21/93 The bids for this project were received in late July. At approximately the same time, Public Works and Parks and Recreation Department staff noticed a substantial increase in the use of water at the facility. Since the resurfacing project is a major project, and any work done on the surface following the installation of the fiberglass would nullify the contractors warranty, staff opted to hire a professional leak detection company to investigate the problem. This work was accomplished without having to drain the swimming pool, although the testing was deferred until after the Labor Day weekend, since the leak detection process required several days without the presence of participants in the facility. This testing could not have been accomplished during the busy summer season without a major disruption to a large number of City programs. Several leaks were discovered during the survey, all of which can be repaired at minor expense. The survey indicated no problems in the plumbing below the pool shell. Environmental Status The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project and determined that the project is exempt under Section 15302 Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (replacement or reconstruction). Disclosure Statement Attached is a copy of the contractor's disclosure statement. Prevailing Wage Statement The source of funding for this project is Park Acquisition Development funds. No prevailing wage requirements were necessary or part of the bid documents. Compliance with Federal and State minority/women-owned business requirements was not applicable on this project. 1.2"3 Page 4, Item J .2. Meeting Date 9/21/93 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds Required for Construction l. Contract Amount $48,950.00 2. Additive Work Item $13,889.00 3. Contingencies (approx. 10%) 6,000.00 4. Staff Cost (design & inspection) 6,000.00 Total Funds Required for Construction $74,839.00 Funds Available for Construction l. Lorna Verde Pool Rep1aster - PR-145 $97,638.54 Total Funds Available for Construction $97,638.54 This action will authorize the expenditure of $74,839.00 previously appropriated funds. After construction, only routine City maintenance amounting mainly to cleaning the pool will be required. Attachments: Disclosure Statement NOT SCANNED Letter from Contractor Detailing Additional Work File: JR-069 WPC F:\HOMEIENGINEER\AGENDA\lomaverd.pol 1.2~1{ 5. 6.. Date: THE CITY OF CHULA VISrA DISCLOSURE Sl'ATEMENT You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters whicr. will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. i ~. ~-,~tLfbwn~i 2. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 109f of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest iD the partnership. ~ 3. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. J1A- 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any mttI9ber of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? .Y~___ NoL If yes, please iDdicate person{s): Please identify each and every person, including any a,ents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City iD this matter. . 6.~r D;ke- Have you and/or your officers or agents, iD the ag~ate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member iD the current or preceding election period? Yes_ No If yes, ate which Council member(s): · · · (NOTE: AUam'd&6~"'~~~ :J. ~e.K CbLV(\~ Print or type D&IDeof con tor/applicant 7'~~'93 1.2, ? · P~rsO" is tlefiMd 41: -Any INJividMal.fi"", Ct)-p4rfMnhip,jtJirtl """"n, auociGliM, 60cial club,.fraIemlll ",,_ZIllion, corporrllion, auue, "'"I, nceiwr, 6YfIdjctUe.1his lINlorry DIlI~r CDll1lly. dl)' IINl CtHllllry. dl)' rraunicipaJil)', 4UlriCI, or OIMr political Albdivilion, or IIIry OIMr,roup or Ct1IIIbiNuion tIt'Ii", lIS II lI1Iil. - ~-.. ~-':-"'-.. - . -.. "':' - , ~. :.". .-- ;/.;~~ ~;~ ~~~;:-2'~;~~:' "';3 ' 1/'" I;;~' I>;,;tJ I 2 A.~ 9: I 0 COI\:TRACTORS Lie. #52578;" August 6, 1993 City of Chula Vista Engineering Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA. 91910 Attention: Mr. Shale Hansen Dear Shale; Enclosed is the subcontractors statement, along with a few references, as you requested. I did not realize that the subcontractor sheet was necessary as we will not be using any subcontractors on the job, consequently it was omitted in the initial bid proposal. . . The proposal on the addendum for the replacement of the pool and deck hardware is also included. Please call me if you have any questions on these items. I have discussed using a bond coat with Alison Osinski. I strongly recommend that the city consider this option. It is basically a primer coat used before the glass is applied. It offers superior adhesion and alkaline resistance on a long term basis. After extended research into this process, I have incorporated it on all of the pools we now resurface. I would like to offer this as an option on the Loma Verde pool. An additional cost of $ 6900.00 would be required for the application of the bond coat. Please contact me if you have any questions. I loo~ forward to hearing from you and working with you on this project. I await your decision on the option and the addendum proposals. Sincerely, ~Qn~ Derek Downey cc; DD/km I~-r 3347 INDUSTRIAL COURT SUITE D - SAN DIEGO, CA 92121- (619) 792-6553 - BOO-B92-POOL - CONTRACTORS lie. #525787 Peraaglass Referral List BreMar Management Contact : Ellen #(619) 720-9271 Completed 5 Commercial Pools 1989 - 1993 City of San Diego I Contact : Mr. Karl Kierolff #(619) 692-4921 Completed 4 Municipal Pools 1990-1992 Warner Springs Ranch Contact : Mr. Jay Gonzales #(619) 782-4200 /.1. --, 3347 INDUSTRIAL COURT SUITE D - SAN DIEGO, CA 92121- (619) 792-6553 - 800-892-POOL . ,. ~.. . . The bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontractor , required to be listed by the provisions in Section, "Subcontracting", of the special provisions, to whom the Bidder proposes to subcontract portions of the work. LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS SHEET 1 OF 2 .r Description (Type) of Portion of Work Subcontracted Name & Address (City). ~b ~nJ-(u.dors V\l;ll ~ U~&. ~ ~ OJ4J1I&{ Pad' q, ~ I~ "'I / , . ~ LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS (CON'T.) SHEET 2 OF 2 Name & Address (City). Description (Type) of Portion of Work Subcontracted P.IDDER: "lXre..k ~1'Iti.f B : QJ- TITLE: Pee I 4 Sp:v h~~ner .Contractor is obligated to provide complete address and phone numbers of subcontractors prior to award of contract. IC:\CONTRACT\BOllER.MINI 1.2 -/.1.. RESOLUTION NO. /7;.57 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "RESURFACING OF LOMA VERDE SWIMMING POOL WITH FIBERGLASS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA. (PR-145) WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on July 28, 1993, in Conference Room 3 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received one sealed bid from Derek Downey Pool and Spa in the amount of $48,950 for resurfacing of Loma Verde Swimming Pool with a new fiberglass surface; and WHEREAS, the low bid by Derek Downey Pool and Spa included two minor irregularities: (1) the contractor did not include with his bid package a list of subcontractors and (2) the contractor did not give the City a bid price for additional bid items; and WHEREAS, the contractor subsequently informed the City he did not have any subcontractors and submitted the proper form showing "none" along with his signature and has also submitted a quote for the additive items; and WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project and determined that the project is exempt under section 15302 Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (replacement or reconstruction); and WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is Park Acquisition Development Funds and no prevailing wage requirements were necessary or part of the bid documents and compliance with Federal and State minority/women-owned business requirements were not applicable on this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby accept the bid of Derek Downey Pool and Spa in the amount of $48,950 and authorize the expenditure of $13,889.00 for the additive bid item. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to contract for and on behalf of the City. Presented by John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works F:\home\attomey\1omaverd.bid 1"''',5'' /11.-9 CONTRACTORS LIe. #525787 August 6, 1993 City of Chula vista Engineering Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA. 91910 RE: Loma Verde Swimming Pool ADDENDUM PROPOSAL (#PR-146) Replacement of pool hardware as specified under Addendum #1 as follows: ~ I.Im ~ TOTAL 3 Main Drain Grates 18" x 18" 249.00 747.00 33 Gutter Grates 5 5/16" x 4 ~/8" 45.00 1485.00 1 Recessed life line cup anchors 29.00 29.00 wi eye bolts 42 Inlet returns 12.00 504.00 18 Step rail anchor sockets. Bronze 32.00 576.00 9 Stair Rails (55) 1150.00 10350.00 18 Escutcheon Plates 11.00 198.00 Total Addendum Proposal $ 13889.00 Derek Downey Pool & Spa is not responsible for manufacturers delays in prOduction or shipping. . Note : All rails and hardware will be 304 stainless steel with satin finish, unless otherwise specified. /.2 -II) 3347 INDUSTRIAL COURT SUITE D · SAN DIEGO, CA 92121. (619) 792-6553 · 800-892-POOL m.5 /l7 /14 r JJ e /J1 eL !.. C7 .DR 0 /lV~H c., 13 u .f} i r / S ih e /Ie urA _ /Yo../- meLLo/)/{om4-!-/e FRld49 5 e,fJ --;em JJe/C /7/ / 79 3 ~/ L/c -7 f--4i :<,' f) (J P. m Clime CLose 70 PE//V<j K/fL! e cL "'" &~~~/~-/ Sr~~ /'0 /1 P3 II./' 2{) /Pm 7Zm /ZJd~ - m/1tjtJf( CI'Ir (!oo/VeIL Pf?RSQWS; .t.jou I( eA- d ;-/; ce. L Gt-i Pk: () J:j ~/T-/V +--0 7CJd4Cj) /t T ::LIClS 7RoCieLj .5747/0,0. rll dJqO-;):lf/ P,;n J /! 8us FuLL 0-9 PeRSofl)S PlVdJr7q5-eLf:) cf+Jn~ CLose +0 het"fl2( (-r/LLed . Yhe bus S-rofpec! 0fV fh~ mOLLecr -M/q/fu /;fJ:}cks. TJi ~ 7/?4/VS In ISS lOA) - E>u'1lw ~ -ro lJus /9.:2. - 90/ Koufe (p;~ LJ ON J-h '€, !i:4cKS ~ r /-1 e/fte d fh e f5 us Shu+ do0k/ o Iu fA e- l'kl1cK5 -e /Jl e C3/h ~/C. f Ass ON -=- 47~,e~ ~ D / d /vo f- iR {/ 4L ;(2 ~ 0U/z A-I- )-/ /1- d &~~.--~ @ !lA-IIE'kFec! . lJJoS+ 0 -f I-h-e fJ4SS CN11'7-ieIPS weee H{)ose k-ee{JeKS CJ!:- J-tfet.. WO;r=./(e,e5 1- / /( e.. /J1 Cf .s 'C L ;=:- ~ A //1/4 cJ '0 IC / '/ I 0 j2- /-fz e In tu e/!. e /-1/5 '/q-/v J'C (W{)~ kiN? FI2/ewdsJ )- 7h e Cj 5 fJ e/rf( 077icr -4 L;/li.. e E/U'j'L/s/' ------ / /; eKeS' -/ iUeiC-c -.5 /0 c1eHJfs FRCJff} ..o;~F c:Rref1)! S~lIooLs ,- (/lfel{)(jsA~es.. 77i ~ /Jus (;>C72/'//EIC f~Ro:2 e IN /-1/5 flif!lve/Cs Se/f-I-, ?T7C"hljJ)-/PV't f-o '7e~ /I;.e.-/3 us S 7ffIC red " r;{ ce 8us ..006 K-S Wef2~ ~LOS ed ~ PeOj7L e SfA-R+ed +CJ 5 C fC €-l:'W] / If @,L L , r /ai..d C' I/eruf CJ/Ve -J. CJ S 76fJ A/1Jd 5 e 14- rei 0 W i1J, I ~ L.-d H, Co g~~~:J GJ dfC/tJee loof7'C?/U fh 'G doops +d 11z~ Bus I' /1 boo t? 3 /J7 livvles PAd P /1-ssed-. $ce bus LJ~/rJerc WI1S 57:.LLI/V 1-1/& St>/f/ If:-teo 2-e.i-Uj ~ I j-oLd C'i/et2Jjo/'U-e. -It:) :5 M/Ud ufJ A!/1Jd r () SIIV7 L e {?/'Le Ou + 1ft '-G F~o~~ dooR. {)m -/-0 /IJ ~ / tuAel2e 7i:/JcKs H/1d U/#c4 U/'CCe f4 ecr C-vd?,e~ 90/~7 H/Jc! 0/1-1 eie M'-G 7k/1FHe ' f!ho/i-e/C. 3 m IJVufcs @ ?4s5ecL ~ T4 <e flus {)f(/t/ez- wAS Sf/'iL I/o 1-,4 e. .DRiVeRs SeJ1-/: /R/mj +0 S//fR~ f-J ~ Lfus e> /vo/- QJvc e d/'d fA'€- 13 us OR /V e IC 11 -5S /5 r - tv;;;; Prl :55ofU41 e~ S.4-f:7Py . &~ ~ -- ~ aJ T tu/f5 f/; '€.. l4S+ j//f550VeJRjelt 0+ S?- cY~Me JJusr TW/1Sv/Rec-//rU7 /~ce.. olh e/C fJ45~O/U/-f7'e,es) // 0/1-5 /Y7~ /2~- S/O/v c e.4p,I.;(-'1 t-cJ J;e(:;-I) olUe 0 ::9-7-. /lSIi<e..jJeo;pLe we,ee (?eOS5/kr -de S7Reel- CJ IV /flU c! {3 f- ~ c3 ~ fit e 7fz/1c KS . A -I7J /f .f fOlivf /ivl/ht'e, (j/t1cJeefr/tk/vlesJ.. "?he ,7>3.;< g 05 De/(/e/C. R/fiV o(Jee )0 See ;F ;I~ c!t)oLd /leLfJ4t He Le ~7 /l- / m/f-~ /?:?/;vf SM-l/o/O SeCvR!l-c; G-U/1s C3VeR- .6,/ t4 ~ .805" f~Ld Riel( {]-/f/G e;)1- Ie f(~d, c;; f/; -e kJ{)/G~ HNd So o~ tauNd h. oL L..e res -10 .5-/0 f ' luo CJAJ e- rh d of It;. ~ ~ !iA--f~. -= ~ - ~ &4 ~ -~ @ /A:~LLer :5 eCu~ /Iy ieAL I: o(/ete KO#7 fhee ~LLe'r 57'A-7,1oV g-R/5 S~ed SM ?;o/O j -' 57# 7/om 5eco,e; /Cj de /Roue; Seeu~;1r .f);c1/Uo Y- Re/fl/z e 7h<e. Ll05 (;1-1- u+ do UJ 121 ) {uA-S .f)/'ecf O/() -m ce ~/fc!(S - 7i 'e gus P/2 /t/e~ .;J/o! /uo -f 7e{L e ilh e/G C/m e C3 {! JAe/11 (i-' drd"J, n e sou~ SOONe! 7fi-o t.!.. ey /lrk-e '7oP TA -e., L/f-5/ :? /J7//O vle..s w/f5 Le/4v/';vl JA~ P.Jt-L/J1 ~/Ir 541/o?o..:7 COQLct 5" ee -Ii ~ 7KoLGe'(~ r C/e~ t eel' /0 /lie ~ ~A/C.eiH-' -I-eJ hHt/~ d ~ 7KoLLecr ~ 7O;:z ... -r S Mfec! /VeA;:.. -# G .bus /w C/4.se. fA.-U eJlfrL -/-0 1 e f fA G LJ/C ,-veIG o~ ~ e; ~ H -e .$v:5.... C!~~ ,-~ @ T I- -rook /h~ .B os oRi verc AN AcId-lto/()/fL d/-3/n/ivu-lC5 -fo F//v/fdr G-e -f- f-A ~ bus MI9-IU ffJlfi".s/o ~ - ~/Of'/N e- -/0 Ym'l/1fe- (Pt"5 de.). p<e. 7d~/1L ,L.t...//fS A-lttCOf(/m~eL.~ /0 -// /);//ou-le.5 - 1l14'r.b-e, L6/t.Jf~e) Ju Ir luffs 7i:Cj//uf -I~ f,efCf Ii--If-e/Or- /t)~ /C; 01fA-..f f tv/{-5 dO//vJ _ J w!4-S ouf- S/c!e ot-lh'€- gU5 LJlfeeel/h; Vie /R/lFrl'e- (i./l-e-7/2oc/(sJ wes-liJo()fl.)cl FKok{ ~T/!7i()/O :3)t9C'C/,e/ltJ ;1-;; e. Cul2 h -lRAe k, I? I ef( G/f-R. e / /l LJ /45 P;R- C!.c-f;iJe; 7R.l'?rP/e-- E/fS r ~ otl/t.hL C WJL WJ2..R e.. woej('Jv9 f{)1e!lzel2-~ i Whc:.N t~e. .bus wA.s 57/feJec{ &~~ - 7 (iJ r HeL f) !3/1e K /I; ~ w ces r- /J{)uwci ?;iAFP/c: ) 50 -Ih ce. .805 CouLd pUGL //0- ~tJ 7h~ fluS 57)f~k) , .7FO~Lowec! ;f-J 'G ffus (3VC'1C f-ol/;el3u5 570? /f/?el4. 1< I70~ d~ vlZ/ye~ lie ShooLcf c4t[ rOL /l-ee Lc?/fr gu:5) f!e54-lcl ~ /1 /5 dos5 %1. cf H/M -ro pl((.(/e. tA<e.- iJ/'1eff ~~ 5/'T/VL);e96 " ~7JJe ow frJ:;ou/OcL ?a/ Roufe~u/1j;J ~ lJ-4eK7ARO'7~ J/J7fJel2itJ-Ld&/ic4~ 57e/1-/UcLJ {?OK-.4IU#dO CD 5/-1/V lJ/eC;6 I /4 /' /VCJ 7;~~ 6.~ 4 /J}/J/V.4?€~ o;e /J1A/N";~/VC €... CO/n e. -10 cAec/( fA ~ 5A-F-fe'l e;-/-r/.efiv5- )z;tJIV {ff /l;eitc .f);e/j;ees See/J1 -fo 57/ ck tJ~~ -y (iJ he ///2ou/Vct /-0 )Ie L~ r Pr((t/e';C f);d /VcJ I- fler GU+ o-f f-h~ Bus H//l/VCff7/n~ -I-oe.hecK#;~ 60S ~ I,4c1c! ,€e&5 #/5 70 -14 e c?t'-fLj CoolVc~rL CJ;- (!!,hul-4-- (/(91-/+. FoR. S~(/~/CI1-L R e 11 5 CJPO 5," /J1 e fRO p Ii L t f /f1V 71C111O ~ i f .:3 Cf .:5/ C? frr1 @ -Ii e .oRI f/e/L 0 -f- fi uS 19~.I ./Je !~e.5 S{7(/BICJ:t L o-me/C /J1 /513//5 7h12()oy4 chutA- ViS 7ff I' W 1305 -P' /P,;z .f)R!Pe>S /JKOCi'1A C/wL,+ tis /:rr- () IU 13 R{)R J Lu 1+ l.j 0 iv eIIUL/1- I/J5T/g-) 93~ V?ouJe. ~ I/;ei 1(()7)r7€ /I;--e /Buses bl7/!..<e'1 Alud $OIr/€-+/;-nf?S HoureLy, ,</15; liouJ~I-:: ;4Ffe/C:r 70 -f-- M~ o//r'C:/G /A55o/V-4~e,e 0 -f~ IA ~ fib5 ~ c4'e~/(ed T-iJ --e.., L3us Our. 70LcL M~ .../JU.5 j)R/'f/e~ Ev~~7' ;/ / / J1 I o IV e. i-V /-J .s (!J) 5f 4 f-/ e 5.4 / <.d t o/-t- f--t; 14- ~ s /R/f4/-' < ~ (ofC,9* ft'G ferLe- cY~~.-/ C~~..:r:~ ;ii:V4tl_iOlio,-,,:",h.,' ..... (j) f C?4L'-Lec! (?/J-y HALL whe/U I9CJ-r }/()/n~ Fo/C /00 f2eJZ1S0ItJS... @ L w/fS /1i/~k;N7 0'; e veec.; dIVe Ei se / io Ch vL.4 V/sJ;; .. a e7//m9 J-Iv~ I- bCf th<€-..buS O{IC fh'L DfC/l/elC . I miRed ;a f!4T cfJlll/'j) ~ SHe /-I,/fj()/<ecf me ro/C C/-fLLIfi-'1 . S/le 5/f-id) 5/1e LUOC/U P/fS5f-h 'e. In e 55 4fe /fkJ/O'i J 4/)d MLd m e -fa #k~ If &'.451" :L~Ld ;lee f GuocA::. cZ be e/4f-C- ilVy (IYJ TS J PA-IKf f!/f/U!f q()o! :T J/()U t/jJ vjude~ ~/n BR...c;e/VCLf :5/-1 UA-J:oHJ5 ~ul-J -5v F'rc?lC rl?CJ/Yl deLA-CjecL )//,-I-e/C 51-/- (!) e K, /-/4/Vd L ~ - m A- k ~ tJ Q~ U I? /l. -I- e. d /. S - C u S~ JDN.5 .. VJ1)c1eR. E'/7JeR- geruo'j.57kU55 I &~ ~ -/0 (jj) f/lvf!-L ~ me.. lUotc!-h Boovud ffloCLe~ WefU+ t-h((ou1A. f-h-e. ~eo5siI1J7JU5,p ~ e FoR e tt, ~ Bu5.5 h (.; + Co GO fl) .. c-4,--s:~e fAre !uON --D1546Led SCfCe~#1ed - rL05 + COJ1JfteOL.4 ne j)t5/thLec! f(ee/- 57/l-Cjed C/ftm ~ em 1J/lUed c.o/V~l2oLt..d C1~-rrB 7too (ij ; d eAfe 11 B 0 u+ peopL e / Yo ou R ru ~/r h..bo rc IN 7 C tf res " {!!J~~~ -/1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY: /7:J.5r RESOLUTION: AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN PARKING PERMIT POLICY TO ALLOW RESIDENTS TO PURCHASE PARKING PERMITS f,S, Community Development Director V..... f\ r 10hn Goss, Executive Director-.Ji" ~ ~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No -X.) Item J:I Meeting Date: 9/21/93 ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: On August 6, 1993, a petition, with one hundred signatures, from the residents of the Congregational Tower at 288 F Street, was submitted to the City requesting that the City reconsider placing parking meters in the public parking lot proposed for construction at the corner of Church Avenue and Center Street. (Locator map attached.) Apparently, the seniors residing at the Congregational Tower have been parking their cars on the vacant lot because of the proximity to the Tower and convenience and because it does not have parking meters. Agency staff met with the managers of the Congregational Tower and discussed the current parking accommodations at the Tower and the issue was presented to the Town Centre Project Area Committee. The following report addresses the petitioners concerns and a proposed resolution. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the following amendment to the existing Downtown Parking Permit policy: All residents located within the parking district boundary be allowed to purchase parking lot permits which would allow residents to park in lO-hour public parking lot metered spaces all day. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On September 9, 1993, the Town Centre Project Area Committee (sitting as the Downtown Parking Place Commission) considered the Congregational Tower petitioner's concerns regarding the placement of parking meters in the public parking lot planned to be constructed at Church Avenue and Center Street. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council amend the existing parking permit policy to allow all residents located within the parking district boundary to purchase parking lot permits which would allow residents to park in lO-hour public parking lot metered spaces all day. (Draft minutes attached.) 13'/ Page 2, Item ~ ~ Meeting Date ~V DISCUSSION: The vacant lot that the petitioners refer to is located at the southwest corner of Church Avenue and Center Street (locator attached). It was formerly owned and used as a parking lot by the Community Congregational Church staff located adjacent and to the east of the Tower. Recently, the site was purchased by the Redevelopment Agency to be combined with three additional parcels to the south to create a 72-space public parking lot. The new parking lot is located within the Downtown Parking District and is being financed by the District (a portion of the funding is a loan from the Redevelopment Agency). Staff plans to recommend award of the construction contract for the parking lot at the September 21 City Council meeting. Once the 72-space parking lot is constructed, parking meters will be installed for all spaces. It is estimated that fifty-percent of the spaces (36) will have ten hour meters and the balance will have four hour meters. The meters are expected to generate revenue to pay for the maintenance of the parking lot as well as generate funds toward repayment of the Redevelopment loan and for future parking improvements within the District. The petitioners' issue was forwarded to the Parking Place Commission for comments and recommendation. The Commission recommended that the City Council amend the parking permit policy to allow residents to purchase all-day parking permits. Currently, only employees of merchants located within the parking district can purchase permits. The current employee permit program allows permits to be purchased monthly, quarterly, or annually. The permits can be used in ten-hour spaces located within public parking lots which are enforced from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. for $18.00/month. Ten-hour meters cost $.lO/hour. At $.90/day ($.10 X 9 hrs) X 6 days/week the actual cost for a full day's parking would be $9.00 per day or $5.40/week or $21.60/month. If a permit is purchased, the cost is discounted to $18.00/month (or an average of $4.50/week or $.75/day). Staff recommends that the permits be available to all residents who live within the parking district to be fair and equitable. Currently, there are 80 single family and 339 multi-family residential units within the Parking District. There are 308 lO-hour parking spaces throughout the parking district. The addition of about 36 10-hour spaces from the new parking lot, will result in a total of 344 lO-hour spaces. Less than 50 employee permits have been sold and it is anticipated that there will not be a great demand for the residential permits, since most of the residential units have adequate on-site parking. Community Development Department staff met with the managers of the Congregational Tower and learned that the Tower currently has 42 on-site spaces for their 186 units. The spaces have been provided (without cost) to the residents on a first-come first-serve basis. Twenty-eight Tower residents are on a waiting list for on-site parking spaces; therefore, of the total 70 Tower residents who own motor vehicles, 28 are parking off-site. The management also indicted that the Tower is provided with Handy trans transportation service. If the City Council approves the recommended amendment to the parking permit policy, the 28 residents that own vehicles and currently park on local streets and parking lots will be able to /3--~ Page 3, Item --L1- Meeting Date ~)1J purchase a permit to allow them to park in lO-hour metered spaces within public parking lots (including the new lot to be constructed at Church Avenue and Center Street). An advantage to the Tower residents will be that those using the parking permit will not have to be concerned with paying the meter fee before 9 a.m. on a daily basis to avoid getting a ticket. The Tower's manager and four Tower residents testified at the Parking Place Commission meeting held on September 9, 1993. All indicated that the parking permit for residents mitigates their concerns and whatever help the City could provide, they would appreciate. FISCAL IMPACT: A limited increase in revenue would be realized if all 28 residents purchase parking permits. An estimate is 28 x $18.00 per month = $504 per month minus the revenue generated from those vehicles that currently use metered spaces. CS/PRB:ss Attachment NOT SCANNED (pam/DiskS/pkgmetrs .rpt) 13-;$ /13-1 RESOLUTION /7:2.5'Y RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN PARKING PERMIT POLICY TO ALLOW RESIDENTS TO PURCHASE PARKING PERMITS WHEREAS, a petition from residents of the Congregational Tower located at 288 F Street was submitted to the City Council requesting that the City reconsider placing parking meters in the public parking lot proposed for construction at the corner of Church Avenue and Center Street, WHEREAS, on September 9, 1993, the Parking Place Commission recommended that the City Council amend the existing parking permit policy to allow all residents located within the parking district boundary to purchase parking lot permits which would allow residents to park in public parking lot 10-hour metered spaces all day, WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Congregational Tower resident's request, the Parking Place Commission's recommendation, and issues pertinent to the request. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby fmd, order, determine and resolve to amend the existing Downtown Parking Permit policy to provide that all residents located within the parking district boundary be allowed to purchase parking lot permits which would allow residents to park in public parking lot 10-hour metered spaces all day. ~~ Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney PRESENTED BY: Chris Salomone Community Development Director (pamJDisk#5/ congreso) /3~f DRAFT MINUTES TOWN CENTRE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE CITY OF CHULA VISTA September 9, 1993 8:45 a.m. Council Conference Room City Hall 1. Roll Call Members Present: Chairman Mason, Members Winters, Blakely, Altbaum, Sanchez. Members Absent: Member Lembo. Staff Present: Principal Community Development Specialist Pamela R. Buchan, Parking Operations Officer Robert Baker, Community Development Specialist Miguel Z. Tapia. Others Present: Downtown Manager Coburn, four persons representing the Congregation Tower including residents and management. 2. Approval of Minutes of August 5, 1993. MSC (Blakely/Winters) to approve the minutes of August 5, 1993 as mailed. PARKING BUSINESS Item 4 for the Agenda was discussed before item 3. 4. Petition from Congregational Tower Residents; re: Parking Meters at Church A venue and Center Street Parking Lot. Chairman Mason indicated the Committee received a memo from Staff regarding the petition from the residents of the Congregational Tower. The residents request that no parking meters be installed within the lot. Staff s recommendation is to install the meters in the parking lot and offer the Parking Permits to all residents of the Parking District, including the Tower residents. He asked Staff as to the latest events related to this issue. Miguel Tapia responded that the Redevelopment Agency will be reviewing a resolution to award the contract for the construction of the proposed parking lot. This will not have any effect on what is being discussed now because the installation of parking meters in the parking lot is a minor and one of the latest stages of the construction. This item will be presented to the City Council for consideration and a final determination at one of their meeting this month. The Committee's recommendation will be forwarded to the Council. Mr. Mason acknowledged the presence of residents and manager of the Tower and ask them if they wanted to speak on the issue. Messrs. George Earnst, Al Carrignan, Jerry Sandoval, and John O'connell spoke on the parking 13--7 DRAFT Minutes August 5, 1993 Page 2 problems the Tower Residents face in the downtown area. They indicated that there are forty- two parking spaces on-site and seventy people with automobiles leaving a deficit of twenty-eight parking spaces. Those residents that have automobiles but do not have a parking space have many difficulties finding public parking available and when they find it they have to walk too far to their automobile. When they park on metered spaces they have to worry about paying the meter, parking enforcement and being cited. While they find the permit system helpful, they expressed concern about some residents not being able to pay the fee because they are on a fixed income. They requested the Committees to assist them in this case. Principal Community Development Specialist Buchan informed the Committee that the lot in question were sold to the City by the Congregational Church. One of those parcels was used for parking for the Church's administrators. The church sold the properties for the purpose of providing public parking. Ms. Buchan mentioned that City Staff met with the Tower Administrators and discussed the current issues and mentioned the possible solution to it. She also indicated that when the Tower was constructed, a variance was issued on the parking requirement to allow them to have one-third of a parking space per unit. The current parking requirement is one and one-half parking space per unit. On a separate note, Member Sanchez mentioned that the parking problem may be worsen due to the fact that the City has posted "No Parking" signs at the vacant lot which prevent people from parking their cars there. Staff responded that the City was forced to install the signs due to the liability faced when cars park on a vacant lot. The City's Risk Manager indicated that the only way to release the City from any liability was by installing the signs. It is believed that this would not have any effect on parking because construction of the parking lot will begin by the end of this month. As a response to a question regarding the permit system, Chairman Mason explained that the permit consists of a tag that can be placed inside the vehicle and can be purchased on a quarterly basis or on a pro-rated basis. With this permit, the bearer can park on any lO-hour meter within the downtown municipal parking lots. In response to the questions as to why residents have been excluded from access to the permits, he responded that the permits were looked at as a tool to improve parking conditions in downtown. It was felt that there was no need from the residents within the district for these permits. Most residents have their driveway or garage and would not buy the permit. Parking Operations Officer Baker indicated that if it is decided that the permits will be offered to the Tower residents, he would have no problem in going to the Tower on certain occasions to make the permits available for sale at the premises so that the residents avoid having to go to City Hall to buy them. Mr. Baker also indicated he wonders whether the Tower administrators could come into terms with the Southern Baptist Church for the use of their /J~% DRAFT parking lot by the Tower residents since this lot is not fully used during most of the week. Chairman Mason indicated this would be something for the Tower administrators and the Church to work out, but it is out of purview of the TCPAC or the City. Downtown Manager Coburn indicated that the businesses on Center Street are looking forward to having parking available at the Church/Center lot. They have expressed a dire need for parking in this area. Member Blakely indicated that he would make a motion in support of offering the permit system to residents of the Parking District on the basis that residential development is encourage in the downtown area and because many of the residents have been in downtown longer than some businesses. MS (Blakely/ Altbaum) to open up the permit system and allow the residents located within the Parking District to purchase the parking permits as recommended by Staff. Motion approved 5-0-1. 1.3--'1 , \ 13-/~ ~\= --l ~~. Item Meeting Date I~ 9/21/93 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT TITLE: REPORT Update on Request for Proposals (RFP) for Solid Waste Disposal Options SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Kremp~ ~ ~ Principal Management Assistant snydootJ! REVIEWED BY: ~ity Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes___ No-X-) At the 9/7/93 meeting, Council directed staff to proceed with an RFP for procurement of solid waste disposal options and to report back at this meeting on the progress of the preliminary steps. This report will detail the steps taken by staff and information received to date. An oral report at the meeting will provide additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to: 1) Continue to work with the Cities of Imperial Beach, Coronado, National City, El Cajon, and Lemon Grove to determine interest in joining the RFP process; 2) Determine appropriate consultant services for the preparation of an RFP and negotiate a contract not to exceed $25,000;" 3) Report back by October 19, 1993 wibh a recommendation for consultant contract and identified funding sources. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Pursuant to Council direction at the 9/7/93 meeting, staff has contacted neighboring South Bay and East County cities regarding involvement in the RFP process (Attachment A). Informal discussions at the staff level indicate an interest by several cities although the City of La Mesa has declined. More specific comments will be available by the Tuesday meeting and discussed during the oral report. Staff continues to gather information regarding alternatives by meeting with potential waste management and disposal service providers such as Laidlaw, Mid-American, Waste Management, Inc., the Prison Industry Authority, etc. However, staff recommends that outside assistance be procured in order to provide the necessary professional and technical expertise. Issuing an RFP for alternatives is the complex process of analyzing the City's current situation and then soliciting reasonable, practical and cost-effective solutions. The problem is much more complicated than the procurement of a new location for trash disposal. The desired end product is a clear understanding of how and at what cost the City might leave the current integrated waste 1'/" / · Page 2, Item If Meeting Date 9/21/93 .management system. Ensuring that the responses are viable and valuable for the Council's decision-making process requires particular attention to the initial analysis and design of the RFP. This, in turn, demands solid waste management resources and background which City staff.does not possess. Attachments Band C describe a list of eight highly recommended firms with recognized experience in the solid waste field which have been contacted for informal price quotes and estimated schedules for the preparation of the RFP. As indicated previously by staff, it appears that there are interested, qualified firms available. , . The cost for the development of the RFP would be under the $25,000 limit outlined in the Chula vista Municipal Code which allows the City Manager to negotiate a contract for services on the basis of informal price quotes without sending out an RFP. This recommended action would save about two or three months which would otherwise be spent drafting and releasing an RFP for consultant services and then evaluating the results, before being able to move forward on the'RFP for the procurement of alternatives to the County syStem. .. A complete packet of the informal letter proposals from all interested firms will be presented to Council at the meeting. The proposals will include cost estimates and projected schedules. All firms have been advised that the RFP for alternatives will cover the comprehensive range of waste management services the City requires, rather than just disposal of solid waste, as well as a total cost picture. This will address Council's specific concerns regarding meeting State mandates for waste reduction and liabilities for past and present usage of the County system. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated range of consultant costs for the development of the RFP is $15,000-$20,000. The actual range submitted by the eight firms will be presented at this meeting. The City's portion of the cost will be determined subsequently after concluding discussions with neighboring cities. Total costs for the RFP development and identified funding sources will be detailed when the issue returns to Council in October 1993. )'/.,2: ~~ft- ~ ~~~~ ---- Attachment A CllY OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER September 13, 1993 Robert Acker, City Manager City of El Cajon VIA FAX 588-1190 Dear Bob: I am contacting you to see if you would have an interest in pursuing additional information about sub-regional alternatives to the County's solid waste disposal system. On September 7, 1993 our City Council directed that we proceed to develop and issue an RFP for alternate disposal options which would also include responses as to how we continue to meet our AB 939 obligations. We anticipate possibly having a consultant to assist us in the endeavor and are in the process of examining a scope of services and getting informal price quotes. Most likely, alternatives would consist of a transfer station somewhere in the south sub-region and rail or truck haul to an alternate site or perhaps alternative technologies. We hope to benefit also from the North County JPA experience now underway. One of the initial decisions before issuing any RFP is what cities might be interested in being a participant, how much flow that might represent and willingness to cost share for the RFP effort. (We estimate preparation of an RFP might be in the $10,000-$20,000 price range.) In that light, we are contacting the cities of Coronado, El Cajon, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove and National City to see if our efforts might be pooled and the trash amount available expanded. We, as you, are members of the Interim Solid Waste Commission and recognize that all of us have committed 50%, or in some cases 100%, of our waste stream under the terms of the agreement. Nonetheless, we feel it might be desirable on all our parts to get as much information as possible as soon as possible about alternatives to the current system. Our Council is meeting again on Tuesday, September 21, 1993 to discuss this topic further. We realize that you need additional information before being able to make a commitment or a recommendation to your city councils. However, we would appreciate it if you could indicate whether or not you would conceptually have an interest in participating in this process and potentially adding your waste volume together with ours for the purpose of analysis and economy of scale. JJ/-J 276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5031 September 13, 1993 Page 2 A response prior to September 21, 1993 would be appreciated. Please feel free to call me or Stephanie Snyder in our office at 691-5031 should you have question.. Sincerely, 2- i! ohn D. Goss . City Manager t /0/,'1 CITY OF CHULA VISTA List of Consultant Firms Contacted P & D Technologies, San Diego, CA SCS Engineers, Long Beach, CA Harding Lawson Associates, Santa Ana, CA HDR Engineering, Irvine, CA Camp Dresser & McKee, Carlsbad, CA CH2M HILL, Santa Ana, CA Brown, Vence & Associates, San Francisco, CA Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Falls Church, VA /'1.,-5' Attachment B ~~f?- ~ ~~~~ ---- Attachment C CIW OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER September 14, 1993 Ellen Bogardus CH2M HILL 2510 Red Hill, Santa Ana, CA Suite A 92705 FAX 714/250-5508 Dear Ellen: RE: Request for Proposal (RFP) for Consultant Services to Prepare a Proposal Seeking Alternative Waste Management and Disposal Services This is a follow-up to our conversation today. As we discussed, the City of Chula Vista is seriously interested in determining the viability of alternatives to the currently used system of landfills owned by the County of San Diego. To this end, the City is informally soliciting proposals from firms with extensive waste management experience. Interest in pursuing alternatives has also been shown by some neighboring cities and, concurrently with this solici tation, the City is exploring this aspect with six other cities in the subregional area which may join the project. Should the City Council decide to procure consultant services, the City Manager has the authority to informally solicit interest and price quotes, and negotiate and award a contract for a project up to $25,000. At this time, your firm is requested to consider making an informal proposal with a rough price quote, a brief outline of the services estimated and an approximate length of time for preparation of the RFP once a consultant contract has been signed. Because the natural extension of the preparation of an RFP for procuring alternatives includes evaluation of the proposals received and negotiation of vendor services, you may wish to also include these and any other important services in your price quote. If so, please be sure that fee estimates are detailed by type of service rather than provided as a lump-sum estimate. It is important to note that the City currently has a long term contract for refuse and recycling collection services which would need to be considered within the framework of procurement of an alternative waste management and disposal system. The attachment briefly describes a scope of work to be used in p~eparing your response. If the City'S decision is to proceed with consultant services on the basis of informal quotes, rather than a formal RFP, you will receive more detailed information within the next few weeks. 11/- /, 276 FOURTH AVENUElCHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5031 September 14, 1993 Page 2 Staff is planning to update the City Council on September 21, 1993 on the reasonable expectation of the cost of services, amount of time and interested firms. Your timely response bv return fax at 619-425-6184 will be appreciated. Please do not hesitate to call me at (619) 691-5031 if you bave any questions. Sincerely, tep anie.Snyder Principal Management Assistant r . .. .. .'} /0/-:7 L !.:;:~<I.~iIi: -"il;'IIilIII$"';""""(,,\ji~~'- ... -~'-"-""~l.l. '- -"., h-8~;;t,>;;~1t~~~"l:':J~ September 14, 1993 Page 3 CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR RFP.SEEKING ALTERNATIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL SERVICES GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK Prepare Request for Proposals for procuring solid waste transport, processing and disposal options as alternatives to the San Diego County Solid Waste system. Include specific concerns: 1. Disposal services -Disposal method and location -Short and long term options , . 2. Transfer and transportation -Possible transfer station sites and opportunities -Transportation guarantees and costs .. 3. .. Liability and legal issues -New liabilities assumed in change in disposal location -Legal concerns if interstate commerce involved -Ongoing liabilities for previous disposal in County landfills -Impact on meeting AB 939 responsibilities 4 . Financial capabilities -Ability of respondent firms to meet obligations 5. Technical capabilities -Viability of proposals processes and removal disposal relative to proposed landfills, of hazardous waste prior to .... 1'1- ~ ~~f MEMORANDUM September 21, 1993 FROM The Honorable Mayor and City Council John D. Goss, City Manager? /. George Krempl, Deputy City Manager U7~ ~ ~ Stephanie Snyder, Principal Management Assistan~V2( TO VIA SUBJECT Summary of Informal Proposals for RFP Consultant Services Attached are six informal letter proposals from the eight consultant firms discussed in the staff report. Two firms declined, one because of a conflict of interest with the County of San Diego as a client and the other because a solid waste management experience base was not the firm's primary strength. Of the six proposals, the range in costs presented is $16,300 to $25,000 and the estimated time frame to issue the RFP is 45 days to two months. Specific quotes are as follows: SCS Engineers $24,500 (6-8 wks.) Harding Lawson Associates $20,000-25,000 ( 2 mos. ) Camp Dresser & McKee $17,000 (45 days) EcoNomics/CH2M HILL $19,560 (45 days) Brown, Vence & Associates $16,300 (5-7 wks.) Gershman, Brickner & Bratton $20,000 (2 mos.) /Lj~( Se~rnber20, 1993 File No. 0128993 Ms. Stephanie Snyder Principal Management Assistant City of Chula Vista 718 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista. California 91910 Subject: Request for Proposal for Alternative Waste Management and Disposal Services Dear Ms. Snyder. SCS Engineers (SCS) is pleased to submit this letter of interest for the subject study. The purpose of this letter is to outline our understanding of the existing conditions. the goals and objectives in seeking iJltemative disposal methods and sites, and provide a rough cost estimate for the assistance with preparation of a Request for Proposals (RFP). EXlSnNG COND.nONS San Diego County has asked all cities within the County to commit the cities' waste stream to County landfills for disposal. The cities (including Chula Vista) have signed an interim agreement which commits 50 percent of 88ch city's waste stream to County landfills until May 31. 1994. at which time the cities will decide whether or not to sign long-term flow control agreements with the County. The cities which signed the interim agreement have formed a commission with the purpose of deciding on a new form of jurisdiction over County landfills. In response to the County's request for a commitment, and in the interest of maintaining cost..effective refuse collection and disposal services, the City of Chula Vista (the City) is interested in exploring options which may exist to County disposal. Options for disposal of Chula Vista's waste stream include the following: . Remote disposal in desert and out-of-state landfills currently under development. -' Processing of refuse at a privately-operated meterials recovery facility CMRF). The City of Chule Vista is Interested in retaining consultant services to develop a Request for Proposals (RFP) for alternative waste management and disposal services. Chicago Cincinnat! Kon~m Ci~ 105 Angeles New York Norlolk Phoenix Son Francisco Seallle Tampa Vancouver, B.C. Washington D.C. @ /tj--/(J .-- . - .. -.- . -- ~00~ SM33NIDN3 S:)S 90g0 L~~ 01~ l~ ZV:01 ~6/1~/60 ....,. .....""',.....-...- -...--. Septamber20.1993 Page Two OUTLINl: OF SERVICES The preliminary scope of work for the proposed project is comprised of the following tasks: · Identify options Disposal MRFs Household hazardous waste (HHW) Evaluate options · Identify legal issues · Prepare RFP Talk 1 - Review Background Information SCS will review City documents regarding waste management issues, primarily the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element ($RRE). Household Hazardous Waste Element CHHWE). franchise agreement and refuse hauler permit requirements. and waste management ordinance. This information will serve as the basis for the identification and evaluation of the City's options. Task 2 - Identify Optiomi The City has several options in each of three main categories: disposal. transfer operations. and waste processing/MRFs. Disposal options include remote landfill sites currently under development; some are accessible only be rail, and others are within range of transfer vehicles. Transfer operations to be considered include privete versus public operation. Further. the design.of a transfer station necessary would depend on the disposal option (i.e., rail-served disposal sites could require loading refuse into intermodal containers rether than transfer vehicles). Several MRFs which may be considered are either operational or under developmem in San Diego and south Orange counties. Since a portion of the revenue from County landfills is used for countywide HHW management programs. the City may wish to consider including an HHW mitigation program among the services to be considered. Tad! 3 - Evaluata ODtion, Using County disposal as the basis for comparison. SCS "",ill evaluate the options identified In Task 2. using the following criteria: - . liming - when would the facility (or system) be operational? Consistency with the City's SRRE and HHWE - will the option have a positive or negative affect on the city's ability to meet its diversion goals? . Cost - how do the known costs (or estimated costs, if presently unknown) compare with County landfill tipping fee projections? . Additional evaluation criteria would be developed with the assistance of City staff. ) L/ -j/ '.,. ... >~ - . .. , ~-.. -- ., t00 III ~33NIDN3 S;)S S0g0 LZ~ 01t 1~ t~;01 tG/IZ/60 m~ gUSt'IIG'"" ~II''''''' September 20, 1993 Page Three Task .. - Identify Leaallssues Several legal issues exist regarding the shipping of refuse out of the County or possibly out of state. The City has expressed interest in exploring additional issues such as: . Ongoing liability for past disposal in County landfills. New liabilities assumed in change of disposal site. Reviewing the City's current franchise agreement to detennine the City's ability to change the disposal system. Current status of flow comrol litigation and legislation. SCS will employ an environmental law firm as a subcontractor for this task. We haw established worldng relationships with several legal experts in such areas as AB 939, municipal liability, franchise agllt8ments, and waste management ordinances. Task 5 - DeveloD Reauest for Proposals Following the evaluation of disposal, transfer, and processing options, and the clarification of legal i&sues, SCS will develop the RFP to be issued by the City. The comractor's scope of work in the RFP will be based on decisions made in Tasks 3 and 4. The criteria for evaluation of pro pose Is will be developed through this task. A preliminary listing of evaluation criteria include: . Responsiveness to the RFP. . Consistency with the City's goals and objectives. · Cost effectiveness. . Financial security of the proposer. . Technical feasibility of disposal system (inCluding siting issues). . Environmental impacts of the system. COST Our estimate cost of providing the services described in Tasks 1 through 4 above is shown in Table 1. :';, These costs are based on the following assumptions: . Because other cities may wish to be included in the RFP but are presently unknown, the costs shown are for the City 01 Chula Vista only. If additional cities are involved. the project may require more meetings to address different issues, the review of more background documents. and the evaluation of alternatives to meet different goels and objectives. 11..) ..' I 'J / / '/.~ /, ' hL _. ., .... Jo00~ ~33NI!)N3 S;)S 9090 L~Jo 01~ 1~ JoJo:01 ~6/1~/60 Ms. StephBnie Snyder September 20.1993 Page Four The costS shown in Table 1 are estimates. with final costS to be determined after 8 specific scope of work has been developed. IS ADDmONAL SERVICES The City mBY wish to ret.in SCS to manage the proposal process. conduct a pre-proposal meeting, evaluate proposals received, mBke recommendations. .nd .ssist in negotiations. Details of these tasks Bra 8sfollows: Conduct pre-proposal meeting - SCS will conduct one pre-proposBI meeting, to be leeMed in the City of Chula Vista, and provide follow-up responses to questions raised, if necessary. The estimate cost for this task is $3.000. Evaluate proposals and make recommendations - SCS will do a preliminary evaluation of all proposal received by the City and make recommendations for creating a .shott list- of qualified proposers. This process may Involve contacting the proposers to request clarification or additional information. The results will be presented in B matrix format accompanied by a report noting the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. The estimated cost for this task is $10,000 to $15.000. . Assist in negotiations - SCS will assist the City in negotiating an agreement with the successful proposer. Depending on the time involved, the cost of this IBSk could range from $5,000 to S10.~00. Note that protracted negotiations, changes, tailoring of specific progrBms, negotiating with multiple proposers, etc. can greatly expand the scope and cost of the additional services. QUALIFICATIONS SCS Engineers is an employee-owned environmental engineering firm specializing in solid and hazardous WBste management. Founded in 1970, we are recognized as leaders in the industry in refuse collection. disposal, and materials recovery issues. After aS$isting nearly twenty five cities with their SRREs end HHWEs. SCS has helped I 1.:...J __ J /) / ,'> , -_. .....~ .- S00~ ~33N I DN3 S:)S S0S0 LZ~ 01t l~ yp:01 t6/1Z/60 September 20,1993 Page Five many more cities with various aspects of implementation, including the following: · Franchise agreement review. · Waste management ordinance amendments. Writing RFPs for franchised waste services and evaluating responses. · Hauler negotiations. Privatization versus municipal collection. · Cost.of-service studies to estimate actual cost of collection services, Siting of MRFs and otherwa8te management facilities. In addition to the above collection-related projects. we have designed a 1,600 ton per day MRF which will be used for mixed waste processing, eliminating the need for a costly curbside collection program. This facility is currently in development. Our experience in all aspects of collection, transfer, and disposal of municipal solid waste will enable us to evaluate all of the options available to the City with at the level of detail required to make an informed decision. We appreciate the opportunity to present this letter acknowledging our interest and outlining the tasks involved in the project. If you have any questions regarding this letter. please do not hesitate to call either of the undersigned. Very truly yours, ~~~ Tim Smith Project Analyst Ml Be...,. P. Project Director SCS ENGINEERS ::, .I t-)</ L/ ,~ , '- ,... gee~ ~33NIDN3 S;)S gege L~~ el~ lA 9~;el ~6/1~/6e 99/29/93 17:55 ttl 714 662 3582 HARDING LAW';:;vN IgJ 992 Harding uw.on AnocIelM II September 20, 1993 Ms. Stephanie Snyder Prindpal Management Assistant City of Chute Vista Office of the City Manager 276 Fourth Avonue RHpo.... for Request for Proposal Couultant Semel. AltemaUve Waste Management and Disposal Services Dear Ms. Snyder: " On behalf of Harding Lawson Associates, I am pleased to submit our response to your letter Request for Proposal for Consultant Services to Prepare a Proposal SeoldngAlternauve Waste Management and Disposal Services. As requested. our submittal is informal and contains the following information: 1. An outUne of proposed services, 2. A rough cost estimate. and 3. An approximate schedule for completion of the project. The project you described in your letter could logically be conducted in five steps. Bach step would be executed sequentially. assuring a logical progres.'1ion of the work. The five steps would include: 1. Evaluation of the existing solid waste management systems for the City of Chule Vista and up to six other cities within the immediate region. This evaluation would include an overview of the total quantity of waste currently generated and disposed, the existing and proposed soUd waste infrastructure as well as identification of transfer, transport and disposal needs that would be consistent with the existing and/or proposed syslems. 2. Preparation of a Request For Proposals to identify and evaluate aolid waste traJUfer. transport and disposal capacity alternatives for the regional cities. The subjectRFP should incorporate issues such as: · Disposal Services - Disposal method and location - Short-term va. long-term disposal capacity · Transfer and Transportation - Transfer statton locatlon(s) - Transport costs and guarantees · Liability and Legal Issues - New liabilities assumed in change in disposal location - Legal concerns if interstate commerce is involved Engineering and Environmental Services 3 Hunon centre Drive, Sulle 200, santa Ana, caUlomla 92707 714/556-7992 213/617/1232 A S.bI~of""Id.._ . OJlfca N__ "primed on Re~"d Paper. /' T I ' L~ ./ I.. - / / '" /;--,. a9~2a~93 17:56 ftl 714 662 3582 HARDING LAWSON I4l aa3 Hardl. Laweon Anoc:lata. September 20. 1993 Ms. Stephania Snyder City 01 Chula Vista Pas8 2 . Ongo1ng l1abil1ty for prevtous disposal in County landfills - Impact on meeting AD 939 responsibilities · Financial Capabilities - Ability of respondent finns to meet obligations - System rate stability . System equity · Technical Capabilities - Viability of proposals relative to proposed landfills. processes and removal of hazardous waste prior to disposal - System efficiency and effectiveness . Ability of new system to adapt to change 3. Evaluation of responses to the RFP for Disposal Capacity. This should include an evaluation of: the total system disposal cost and stability; total proposed disposal capacity or time frame; estimated system liability; cost efficiency and effectiveness; and a ranking of alternatives. 4. Presentatlon of a formal recommendation. 5. Assist the cities with negotiations for service with the selected service provider (as requested). Given the nature of the project, we anticipate that the probable timeline for the project, in months, would be 8S follows: Work Item 1 2 3 ~ 5 kJ A. Initial Review of existIng sys. ----- ----- B. Develop and issue RFP =...- ----- C. Evaluate RFP responses ===== ----- ----- D. Present a formal recommend. --- E. Assist with negotiatJons --- ===== Our best estimate, given our current understanding of the project, is that the total cost of the project would not oxceed $20,000 to $25,000. HLA is very interested in helping the Cuy of Chula Vista and tbe other regional dties secure viable. cost-effective disposal, transfer and transport of solid waste. We bel1evethat HLA is uniquely qualified to assist you in this regard. If you require any further assistance as you move forward with' you pIan., .Printed on Aecydod Paper. /LJ--/? I,' ; 09/20/93 17:56 ftl 714 662 3582 September 20, 1993 Ms. Stephanie Snyder City oJ Chula Vista Page 3 HARDING LAWSON 141 004 H.rellng Laweon MlIOol.tea please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned or Mr. William Thomson at (714) 556-1992. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you on this existing project. Your. very truly. HARDING LAWSON ASSOCIATES K~. ~', :::t:;;;;:msen Director of Solid Waste KT/lf OOCCV073JtrJ .~edanRa~dPaper. ) Lj - ) 7 SEP-17-1993 16:50 FROM CDM TO 4256184 P.02 CDM CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. ~Mt/iftHfS. SCiItIfitl$, pIa",.,.,4m~~ 1ge5 PaIcmar Oaks way, SUite aoo carIcIlad. caJifol'nia 82008 619438-7755. Fax: 618 &38-7411 September 17, 1993 Stephanie Snyder Principal Management Assistant City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Subject: Proposal for Consulting Services to Prepare an RFP for Alternative Waste Management and DIsposal ServIces Dear Ms. Snyder: Camp. Dresser << McKee Inc. (COM) is pleased to submit this letter proposal to the City of OtuIa V1&ta for consulting seJVices related to development of a Request for Proposal for alternative waste management and disposal services to assist the city in meeting its solid waste managmnent needs and to achieve the goals of AB 939. ~ on our discussions, other cities have expressed their desire to consider participating in a joint evaluation of these alternatives. Our scope of services and fee estimate are provided for the City of ChuIa Vista only; however, it can easily be expanded to include other dties or additional work activities the dty or regionallnterests may nero. COM, with a staff of over 2000 employees located in more than 60 offices, has been involved in solid waste management for over four decades and has conducted more than 500 solid waste projects throughout the United States. These projects have involved master planning, recycling and waste minmm.ation, resoun:e recovery, landfill design and management, transfer station design.. permitting, groundwater modelling and protection, environmental impact assessments, operation and maintenance services, maintenance plans and closure procedures, and community relations and public participation. The location of our office in Carlsbad assures the dtizMS of Chula Vista immediate attention to their questions and a prompt IeSponse to the many issues that ~ in solid waste projects. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal. If you have any questions or if you require any additional information, please contact us. Very truly youts, CAMP DRESSER<< McKEE INC ~~.. Robert A HawfieId, Jr. Associate (909) ~11 ~Sklp. Griffin. Jr. Vice President (619) 438-7755 ~~'-oIldw\dDala_ P1It*dGlt~_ /1/-/ % SEP-17-1993 16:50 FROM CDM TO 4256184 P.03 CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INO. Stephanie Snyder SepteIhber 11,1993 Page 2 QUALIPICAUQ}l{S COMs project experience includes solid waste master pJannlng, recycling and waste minimization studies, resource recovery, landfill siting, design and permitting. Other solid. waste management projects have included. ~water modeUing, environmental impact assessments, operation and maintezlanc:e plans, closure procedures, community relations md public participation. A brief discussion of our relevant project experience is presented below. KECYCLlNG COM offers the teclmkal eXpertise and fUll range of services needed to develop and implement effective, fuRy-integrated .recycling programs. We completed the SoUl'Ce Reduction and Rec:yding IDement for the City of Chula VIsta and the other dUes In San Diego County, providing the documentation of existing material capture rates and guidance fOr future programs. We have conducted materials market surveys, waste stNam analysE!$ and composition studi2S, and public information I education programs in relation to reqcling projects. Recycling alternatives have also been evaluated during our conduct of numerous solid Waste master plans to be included as part of ove:ra1l solid waste management systems. Our knowledge In the planning.. design, and operation of the various solid waste recycling options ensures an economical and thorough evaluation . of the feasibility of ead\ option. MATERIALS RBCOVERY FACILlTms COM has assisted many communities in moving forward from pilot scale rncycling studies to fun service programs which require the setup, design and construction of material recovery facilities to process soun::e separated recyclable materiaJs. These facilities have been cost eHective1y integrated into the community's solid waste program because of our knowledge of materials processing equipment and their proper application and use. COLLECI'lON AND TRANSFER Solid waste conection and transfer is the most visible aspect .of solid waste manag~en.t to the public. Therefore, any analysis of these systems requin!s a knowledge and sensitivity to the host of issues that arise during the course of these projed:s. COM provides all services related to the analysis and evaluation of collection systems and their implementation, and a number of our projects have included the evaluation of ~ting and alternative haul systems. We also have considerable experience in the evaluation, analysis, siting and design of transfer stations. We have a thorough knowledge of transfer station equipment and its proper application to specific problems. Our work has included "mini-transfer stations" for small rural communities to transfer stations senricing large metropolitan areas. ~on~peper / L/ -) 7 SEP-17-1993 16:51 FROM CDM IU qO::::;)b1 t:lq r-.~q CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. Stephanie Snyder September 11, 1993 fage 3 SUMMARY This broad base of technical expertise is supported by COM ~ environmental, mechanicaL and chemical engineers. Other COM staff specialists have been involved in solid waste management studies include environmental planners and sdentists, institutional and policy analysts and economists. The following summarizes COM's extensive involvement in solid waste. In addition, a project experience matrix is pro'fided for your renew. . ~red over 90 dty. ~onal and statewide solid waste manalelnent plans. COM's staff hasunparaneled experience in the process of solid waste planning and development, from the acquisition of basic data to the formulation of workable implementation plans. Experience brackets all types, sizes, and complexity or jurisdiction. . Over 200 studies involving environmental assessment. eilin& feasibility and selection.. environmental impact analysa. COM is a leading environmental engineering firm in the western United States. The firm has conducted numerous environmental assessmenb, siting teuJDility studies . and has performed the ~na1ysis required to prepare and submit (!I\vironmental impact reports. . Over 200 landfill site selection design studies. Indudine final design of 40 majpr lined landfills <20 to 1.500 tons per dav). COM has extensive experience in Jand.6ll design, including fadlitie$ with natural and synthetic liners, leachate underdrains, and methane gas venting and/or recovery. . Many COM staff have personal experience as ~ble offidals in db-I county. or state solid waste agencies, and with senior positions in vendor firms. COM's staff includes people who have had the pemonal responsibilities for solid waste planning andJ or operations; they understand the practical and political problems of making these syst~ work. COM has worked with clients and the ass<<iated state and federal regulatory authorities through the many phases of the regulatory process. COM works closely with our clients in wnfronting the range of questions and conc~ tha:t arise as part of the regulatory process and members of the project team have extensive exposure In the public arena, presenting project findings to m~ of regulatory age:nc:ies and. to the genm-al public. PrfnIl>d fin rwycIod "... I -~) (/ ~~ ./ SEP-17-1993 16: 51 FROM COM TO 4256184 . P.05 CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. Stephanie Snyder September 17, 1993 ~age 4 SCOPE OF SERVICES This scope of services is intended to provide the Oty of Chula Vista, consulting services for the development of an RFP seeking alternative waste management and disposal services. Om' scope of services also proposes to review the altemative strategies available to meet the goals of AB 939. Tbis proposal is based 01\ our recent discussions related to ttqcling programs, and materials recovery facility and transfer station requirements to serve the city and possibly certain 8UJ'l'OUl\ding jurisdktions. The project will be perfonned in accordance with the proposed scope of services as presented below. TASK 1.0 BASELINE DATA CDM will meet with city staff to review CUITellt status Df the established goals and objectives in the Somce Reduction and Recycling Element previously completed by CDM including, solid waste quantity estimates and waste composition information. Interviews will be conducted with key decision makers and private sedor solid waste haulers to gather their input including: . . Hauling costs . Collection mahods (solid waste, recyclables, yard/wood waste) . Planned solid waste management programs The data obl:ain<<i under this effort will be compiled and will form the basis of the services to be requested in the RFP. Solid waste quantity information will be based on the SRRE information, and results of the hauler interviews. This data will provide summary quantities for ~uation of collection methods, transportation impacts and. current or planned processing facilities. The intent of this task is to address the ability 01 the Oty to m~ the requirements 01 AB 939 through a combination of programs (both current and planned) from the publk, non-profit and private sector. A basis will be es.tablished which includes current divef5ion activities and quantities and those programs or facilities that are needed in addition. TASK 2.0 DEVELOPMENT OF REQUEST FOil PROPOSAL Based on the results of Task 1.0, COM W111 prepare a list of the types of processing and disposal alternatives to be considered in the RFP. The alternatives will be presented to City Staff for review and comment COM will prepare the draft RFP for procuring solid waste transport, processing and disposal services as an alt2mative to the continued. use of the existing or proposed county system. The RFP will include the COlU:er1\S listed in the September 14, 1993 solicitation letter and will provide the criteria upon which Mredon ~'"'*' I ~ SEP-17-1993 16:52 FROM COM TO 4256184 P.06 CAMP DRESSER & MeKE:E INC. Stephanie Snyder- September 17, 1993 :rage 5 selected WlNiors will be judged. These c:riteria will be reviewed. by city staff and will include the foUowing: . 0Jsp0sal services must be able to meet short and long tam needs . Processing and transm options must meet sizing requirements, guarantees and cost constraints . Site selection to minimize environmental impacts . Facilities to be compatible with materials ncovery prograU\5 and marlcets . Must meet legal and liability cOncerns . Must demonstrate financial capabilities COM will c:ompile and summarize the above information and prepare a draft RFP for review by city staff. The comments will be incorporated into the final RFP. DESIG!I{.\ UO RElRBSENT A TIVE The COM project team will be under tho overall direc:t:ion of Charles A. Griffin, a registered civil engineer, as offi:er-in-charge. The project manager will be Robert A. Hawfield, Jr. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE Assuming award of this contract in mid-OCtober 1993, the period of perfonnance for this work will extend to late November 1993 unless agreed to by COM and the city in writing. FEE ESTIMATE The city shall.reimburse CDM for services rendered under this proposal on a time and materials basis using the hourly rates as shown as Exhibit A, but not to exceed the fee estimate shown below; . 80 m ESTIMATE $5,500 $11,500 $17,000 TASK HOURS 1.0 BASELINE DATA 2.0 DEVELOP ALTBRNATIVFS TOTAL 40 1,100 I'rItIr.d 0fI fI1D1CIed "."., I / SEP-17-1993 16:52 FROM CDM TO 4256184 P.07 CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC. Stephanie Snyder September 17, 1993 ,Page 6 PERSONNEL COM has carefully selected the members of the proposed project teun to best match the pw:ticuJar needs of th, City of Chula VISta. The foUowing is a bIieI description of eilCh of our proposed team members: Charh?s A Griffin. P.E.. VJCe-President. As officer-in-cha%ge, will haVl:! overall responsibility for the project, and for et1SUIiDg the proper allocation of resources to guarantee that the project's objectives are maintained. by the project team. Robert A. IfawfieId Jr.. .~iate.. Has been identified as the project manager and will be responsible for the overall direction and completion of this project. Mr. Hawfield has over 18 years of experi~e in the procurement of 50lid waste facilities, development and implementation of long range solid waste management plans, technology ~uation, 1andfiIl design and. siting studies, environmental facility audits and assessments, and. resource recovery feasibility studies. He is the project ~ for the SRRE projects for the citia in San Diego County, including O\ula Vista. Kathl~ A. ~ring. P.E.. Has been identified as the project engineer for this project. Ms. Spring has over ten years experience in environmental engineering, concentrating on solid and hazardous wastes. She has been involved in site in~tigat:ions, permit preparations, feasibility studies, and the development of Sowce Reduction and Recycling Elements. She has completed economic feasibility studies for various recycling programs, material recovery facilities, buy-back centem, and drop-off centers. We are confident that this propOsal will provide the City of O\ula V1Sta the necessary infonnation to make infonned decisions to proceed with implementation of quality programs and facilities to meet the goals of AB 939. I'IIntt1fI f/rI tvI7fdt1d I1fII1W TOT8I- P.07 1"1-2.3 SEP-20-'93 MON 12:03 10: TEL NO: ...~7?_P02 EcoNomics September 20, 1993 BY FACSIMILE Stephanie Snyder;,._ Principal Management Assistant City of Chula Vista 276 4th Avenue Chula Vista, California, 91910 RE: Proposal to Prepare an RFP Seeking Alternative Waste Management and Disposal Services Dear Ms. Snyder: EcoNomics is pleased to present this informal proposal to prepare a Request for Proposals for alternative waste management and disposal services. We have composed a team of experts in the areas of solid waste facility procuremen t, engineering, financing and contracting. The members of the team are: EcoNomics, acting as the prime contractor; CH2M Hilt providing engineering and transportation analysis; and the law firm of Hanson Bridgett et aI, providing legal advice and guidance. The efforts of this experienced team will be focused on providing the City of Chula Vista with a successful procurement for alternative waste management and disposal services. INTRODUcnON It is our understanding that the City of Chula Vista is interested in examining the viability of procuring disposal services that would be independent of the landfills operated by the County of San Diego. In order to successfully achieve this goal, the RFP procurement process will need. to be carefully structured and meticulously executed to withstand the potential political and legal challenges. The scope of work we are offering therefore Includes $3,000 of practical legal advice and review. 832 CUmiTUJI)el Mar, Sl4i[l~ 3 P.O. Box 2209 llel Mm. CA 92014 (619) 481-1980 FAX481-1433 IL/-J-L/ I SEP-20-'93 NON 12:04 ID: T~. NO: ~ern P03 SCOPE OF WORK ~ND BUDGET We have divided the scope of work into two tasks. Task 1 ,establishes the content of the RFP. Task 2 is the actual production of the RFP. Task 1 researches the practicality of alternative di$posal options and the legal and technical issues. This task also establishes the guiding principals and identifies the expected benefits and requirements of the project. Included in Task 1 are the specific concerns described by the City in its letter of September 14, 1993 under the "General Scope of Work". Task 2 details the specific steps taken to produce the RFP. It describes the method we intend to use to develop the RFP in the most cost effective way possible. It also includes the required meetings with key City decision makers to finalize technical and policy issues and to review the draft RFP. The final deliverable will be a camera ready'RFP for issuance by the City. The time required to complete Tasks 1 and 2 and issue the RFP is 45 days. This is a "fast track" schedule and assumeS that the City Manager's Office can provide expedient review of drafts and timely meetings and decisions. As requested, we have included task descriptions and budget estimates for assisting with the procurement process (Optional Task 3); proposal evaluation (Optional Task 4); and contract negotiations (Optional Task 5). The fees for these tasks are dependent on the number of proposals received and the level of project complexity. The estimated fees we have provided for these optional tasks are based on our experience with other projects. TASK 1 R.esearch and Define R.W Parameters T~e goal of this task will be to define the following parameters for the RFP. a) A set of guiding principals that clearly state the City's expectations for the project (i.e. costs, contract terms, City staff requirements, etc,). b) The likelihood and desirability of participation by additional cities- c) The size and type of waste~tream that will be delivered for transport, processing, and disposal. d) The range of processing and dispoSal options that will be considered (both in the short.tenn and over a longer period of time), e) The amount and type of processing (transfer only or some materials recovery). Pase:! /LJ ~;25 SEP-20-'93 MON 12:04 ID: TEL NO: ~077 P04 ...-..-..-..... f) The location of potential disposal sites and the characteristics of each (i.e. remaining site life, status of permits, outstanding legal suits, need for pennit modification to allow deposit of Qula Vista waste, etc.). g) The reliability of different methods of delivery of solid waste to the disposal site(s) (e.g. trUck/rail haul). h) The necessity for any modifications to existing franchise agreements in order to commit the City'S wastestream to the alternative disposal option(s). i) The impact of the procurement process on the City's ability to achieve the AB939 mandates. j) The legal issues associated with the project including: . New liabilities incurred in changing to a new disposal site . On-going liabiliti~ for waste previously disposed of in County landfills (CERCLA and closure cost issues) . Legal issues If interstate commerce is involved . Need for, and desirability of, including a draft landfill contract in the RFP . Legal requirements for landfill owner/operators including insurance, performance guarantees, performance bond, hazardous waste issues, indemnification etc. Task I Estimated Fee: $13,800 TASK 2 Write RPP We believe that the most cost-effective approach to this task would be to: a) Schedule one all-day meeting with the City Manager(s) to review the contents of other RFP's that EcoNomics has issued, and to decide key technical and policy issues. b) EcoNomics will take the meeting results and create a draft RFP. Whenever possible, we will use existing language, proposal forms, specifications and selection criteria from existing documents. Where appropriate, we will customize sections and create new teXt specifically tailored for the project. The draft will be distributed to the City Manager(s) for their comments. Written comments will be reviewed and incorporated into the draft by EcoNomics. Pag.~ J t/ /2 ~ SEP-20-'93 MaN 12:05 ID: TEL NO: **077 P05 NOTE: A decision will be made in Task 1(j) on whether to include a draft landfill contract in the RFP. If it is included, then a draft contract will be prepared as part of the draft RFP. ~ A half-day meeting will be held with the City Manager(s) to resolve conflicting comments and other policy issues. d) EcoNomics will incorporate the meeting results and remaining ~echnical issues into the draft and will finalize the RFP for issuance by the City. Task 2 Task % Estimated Fee Without Contract Estimated Fee with Contract $ 5,760 11,200 TOTAL PROJECT FEE TOTAL PROJECT FEE (Without Contract) (With Contract) $19,560 25,000 OPTIONAL TASKS TASK 3 Assist with Procurement Process (Optional) If desired by the City EcoNomics will assist with the procurement process. This includes; a) . Preparation for, and attendance at a Pre-proposal Conference to answer questiOllS from potential proposers. b) Assisting the City in maintaining a Question and Answer Log for all questions from proposers. (We recommend that proposers be required to submit all questions in writing, and that the City respond in writing via the Q&A log.) c) Prepare addenda to the RFP if required. TaskS Estimated Fee: $ 5,000 Pese. /L/--) 7 -'. -~ ....-- SEP-20-'93 MOI'l 12:06 ID: TEL NO: tt~TI P~Q TASK 4 Evaluation of Proposals (Optional) U requested by the City, EcoNomics wUl assist in evaluating the proposals received. This includes: a) Reading all proposals. b ) Analyzing technical qualifications of proposers. c) Analyzing legal and financial qualifications of proposers. d) Checking references. e) Evaluating and comparing proposed costs. f) Evaluating proposed exceptions to the draft contract (if one is included in the City's RFP). . g) Preparing questions to proposers to obtain additional information. h) Interviews/discussions with short-listed proposers. i) Recommending a proposer for selection by the City. Task 4 Estimated Fee: $ 10,000 TASK 5 Contrad Negotiations (Optional) If requested by the City, EcoNomics and Hanson & Bridgett will assist in contract negotiations with the selected proposer. This will include: (a) Briefing City staff on key issues, City positions, and strategy. (b) Attending negotiation meetings. (c) Drafting the final' contract for signature by the City and th~ successful proposer. Task 5 Estimated Fee: $ 10,000 PageS )L/-;2~ SEP-20-'93 MaN 12:06 ID: TEL NO: 1=1077 P07 I will send you a copy of EcoNomic's Statement of Qualifications for your files. We believe QUI team has the technical and legal expertise plus the experience required by Chula Vista for this important project. If you have any questions or need additional infonnation please contact me or Valerie Lenz, Vice President, at (619) 481-1980 We look forward to discussing our proposal with you. Very truly yours William O'Toole President Pa~6 ) 1~;2.1 09-20-93 02:07PM FROM BROWN, VENCE & ASSOC TO 16194256184 POOZlOO'{ I""'ft. V,nl:8 'Alaedllle' september 20, 1993 fno.I\JYlllI1 Wasll ~lmIn ~IIlllCIS Stephanie Snyder Principal Management Assistance City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 120 M<<IIg(mCry Sncer Suite 680 san FralCiSCOCA 94104 4151434-O!lOO 415/956-6220 FIIX BV A 'Proposal No.: SUBJECT: gs.93 RFP for Waste Management and Disposal Services Dear Ms. Snyder: Thank you for contactin2 "BVA about the project. We are pkased to present our qualifications for selecting a vendor and assisting in negotiations for alternative waste management and disposal services for the City of Chuta Vista, and possibly six surrounding cities. We have extensive ~mcnt ~CI1CC in Southcm California, and have been involved in waste management education, processing system evaluation, recycling program development, and waste tr.msfer system planning in San Diego County. We also have assisted in the development of joint powm authorities (JP As) and m.cmotanda of understanding (MOUs) for cooperative, regional waste management. I am very interesting in working with you on this project. Please feel free to call me at (415) 434-0')()0 if you have any questions. Very truly yours, BROWNp VENCE & ASSOCIATES ~~>-~ '7-- Thomu D. Vence ~ Vice P.ccsideot PrillBd I)Il EnclOS\1teS llrqcJed p~ O;\NICI\O!I,"1CJl1JLAVJS.Lm' ~ 1:)1,. ) 13 {J 09-20-93 02: 07PM FROM BROWN, VENCE & ASSOC TO 16194256184 P003!007 JUi'P FOR ALTERNATIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL SERVICES INTRODUCTION BV A bas conducted many ~ment projects for solid waste f'acl.Iities and seMca throughout California and the nation. These projects included the preparation of a numbec of JalUCSts for proposals (RPPs), mview ofproposals andqualificalionsrec:eivecl, and developmentofselecnon JeCOmmendatioDs. This extenSive experience fully equips BV A with the teChnical expertise and practical know-how 10 respond fu1l:f to the City of Chula Vista's needs to identify and select 80lid waste system alternatives 10 the cuuent County system. Based on our varlDus procurement projects, we believe that tbe successful procurement process lies in the following approach: ~'~<"" .~..........ot . Fully understanding theCliY of Chuta Vista's needs, concerns. and ROlid W8.flte management practices and system' . Clearly defining the alternative system leqUirements from technical, institutional, siting, economic, and contractual risle viewpoints . Developing an RPP tba1 will solicit responses in a clear and consls1ent furmat . Implementing an evaluatiOn process that uses a well-defined set of criteria and a 3COring procedure so that the proposals can be fairly evaluated . Maintaining the City of Chula Vista's involvement throughout the process to guarantee selection of a private sector proposal that best meets the needs of your community. DUFf WORK SCOPE The following scope of work addresses the services we would provide in order to develop an effective RPP for procuring a solid waste processing, transfer and disposal system as an alternative to the current County solid waste system used by the City of Chula Vis1&. Task 1 Review Baekground Information and Develop ItFP Objectives Under this task BV A will attend a project ldck-off meetin& with the City project IDaII3FI' to identify key areas of concern with the current solid waste system~ understand the major objcctiva of the RFP~. and kkntify aYai1ab1c background information and clocumcnta that will help define the service and facUity needs for the City's alte.mative system. . o:~'VISno ~ l:~JIIII 1 ) L/- .3 I 09-20-93 02:07PM FROM BROWN, VENCE & ASSOC TO 16194256184 P004!007 Based on our meeting with City staff and review of available documents and information, we will provide draft -baCkgrOUnd. and "objectives" sections of the RFP that addresses at a minimum the following issues: . Existing ftanchise service and waste diversion programs ,. Types and amounts of materials in the wute atream . Recovery requirements for the alternative system to meet AB 939 goals . Transfer station and disposal facility siting constraints .. ''l(\.': . Interface of the proposed alternatives with current collection system . Household hazardous waste handling, publie education, and other QOl'I1ponents of tho desired system . General Jequirements for project development, financing, construction, and operations Task 1 Develop Draft RFP BV A will draft the RFP document, which will address the required services and proposal n=quirements is sufficient detail to assure the City receives appropriate responses from the vendors. The document will clearly identify the City's objectives for the project and specify its xequi.rementJ regarding ownership, financing, vendor risks and responsibilities, and other parameters of the anticipated system. The RFP will identify proposal requirements as they relate to the following areas: · Technical . Financial · Contractual . Environmental . Qualifications and experien<:e In addition to the proposal requirements, BV A will include a section describing the selection process and the criteria for proposal evaluations. Tuk 3 Firmlize RFP and Assist DuriD& Proposal Phase Baxd on the City"s review and comments on the draft RPP, BV A will ftnalize the document for issuance by the City. o:~\CKIJI.A VJa..PRO 0lJI1lW93 l:SO fill 2 /L/ -32 09-20-93 02:07PM FROM BROWN, VENCE ~ ASSOC TO 16194256184 P005!007 BV A will assist the City throughout the proposal phase of 1be project in a number of ways, depending the Cityts needs. We can develop a vendor mailing liSt 10 assure the RFP is distributed to appropriate finns; assist or lead in conducting a proposer's conference; provide techo.ical information in response to vendon' questiorls; and provide RFP addenda baed on the results of the proposers' conference or questions which arise. Task 4 EftJuate and RaDk Proposals Using the evaluation critaia developed in Task 2, BV A will review and prioritize 1be responses tD 1hc RFP. We will prepare casy-to-read summaries of those proposers who meet the minimum requirements of the RFP. The summaries will address each of the criteria. In conjunction with the City. BV A win develop a ranking and scoring system that will allow the City to objectively review and score each response to the RFP. An overall numerical score will then be detmnined .' ... ..." r-, ,"" for each proposal using the scoringcrlteria. The pRJPOSals will then be r.mked based on their numerical SCOI\"3. . Based on the evaluation of responses and the scoring and ranking process, the highest mnlcing proposer will. be recommended to begin negotiations. BV A will pepare a tedmicaI memomndum for' the City documenting the evaluation process and a discussion of the recommended vendor. BY A will also note whether lesser ranked proposrn are also quaU:fted. This list would be available to select the next qualified finn in the event that a successful agreement cannot be reached with the highest ranked proposer. Task 5 NegotiatiODS AssIstaDce 'BV A has worked closely with a number of communities in the process of negotiating contracts with seIVice providers. We understand the critical issues that often slow negotiations and lead to the neglect ot service efficiency and cost effecti,veness. We are experience with these issues and have proven solutions accep12ble to both parties. BV A will provide on-going technical eontract negotiations service em a per session basis. The level. of effort nec:essa.:y for contract negotiations is very specific to the contract and proposer involved. It's not posst"ble to accurate1y predict detailed negotiation costs at this time. &.~\alULAVI8.nO CPJnom 1='0.. 3 p/JJ 09-20-93 02:07PM FROM BROWN, VENCE ~ ASSOC TO 16194256184 P006/007 BUDGET / BVA expects to eomplere Tasks Ilhmugh 4 for less than $25,000. Addltional1\:es for Tuk S ,,~. wm be cIetennin<4 as the """P" is defined. pJ/"" A~ ~ . Tpk Hours .J:mL 11fj;:lIif 0 l) V? ,0 $3,580 1 ?-ti 0 S7 284 tll~) , 1" $4,426 ~\: 32~ 70 r~. 41 ;-'] p;~h'r!J. 4 84 S8.468 523,758 $1.240 S24,M . SUbtOtal Expenses Total QUALD'ICADONS We have guided many ~f our municipal and private clients through the complex process of procuring waste management services and facilities. We hetp determine the best insti1lltional arrangements for program and facility development and operation; the possibilities range from implementation by an individual jurisdiction to various rqional approachC$. We also ~ experienced at assessing the optimal mix of public and private sector involvement in the development, financing, construction and operation of programs and facilities. A few of our California procurement and other Southern California projects are listed below. We can provide more detailed description of our experience, as well as references, on zequest. Project Client Recoveq and Dispoal System Implementation; Riverside County . Agua Mansa MRF Engineering and Procurement . Double Butte MRF Hngineering and Procurement Recycling Technical Assistadce Program San ~o County Curbside Recycling Implementation. and Rate Study Rivuside. County Inteljurisdictional Waste Supply Agreements and Riverside County Flow Control . o:\NICJ\Om3~na.PKO ~ 1=-'0,. 4 JLI.' J 'i 09-20-93 02: 07PM FROM BROWN, VENCE ~ ASSOC TO 16194256184 P007/007 Project Clent MRF Feasibility Study City of Glendale Transfer' Station Deailn and Procurement City of Ontario Mechanica1 Separation for Recycling San Diego County Integrated Waste Management Workshop for San California Energy Commission Diego County Solid Waste-to-Energy Project Feasibility Study, San Bernardino County P.n.gi.neering, and Procurement i i: '~I,"" PERSONNEL BV A's staff of more than 30 includes licensed en&inecrs, economic analysts, CADD specialists, and envIrorunental planners with hands-on experience in designing, procuring, aDd opetating waste management programs and facilities. Introduced below are a few of our senior staff members. tbOIlBi D. Vence, P.E., Viee President. Mr. Vence has mOIC Lban 22 ycan of wa.sto management experience reflecting a sound technical and operating background, as well as a solid foundation in business and financial issues. His experience includes waste management contract review and negotiation, feasibility studies, proj~ procurement and financing, the transfer, hauling, and proceasing of materials, and strategic planning for implementation. Mr. vence has provided project direction for numerouS solid waste projects, ranging from MRF and transfer station planning and engineering to integrated waste management planning under AB 939 and countywide materials processing system planning. These projects include developing and negotiating contracts to ensure waste stream supply and analyzing equipment IeQuiremcnts for waste management programs and facilities. He has lectured and is widely published in the fields of energy and solid waste management. Mr. Vente is a registered mechanical engineering in California and Pennsylvania, and bas an M.B.A. and a B.S~ in engineering, u well as a certificate in hazardous waste management. Steve Brekke-Browne1l, SeDlor PJanner. Mr. ~Browne11 is a senior manager at BVA and has more than 1S )'ear5 of cx:pcricnce in recycling program planning, implementation, and operations. Be regularly manages in-house teams and subcontractors in performing BVA's larger and more complex assignments. In addition to his progwn ~ experience, he provides recycling planning, technical assistance, reKarCh, and analysis to a variety of clients. Mr. Brekke-Brownel1 baS a B.A. in philosophy. o;~VJS.PIlO ~ 1:50,. s / L/-Jf SEP-17-'93 FRI 15:48 ID:GBB FALLS ChURCH Ta 1'10:703-698-1306 **329 P01 GIB saUD WASTE /VI.ANIJG&./If.NT CONSULTANTS September 17, 1993 VIA FAX MI. Stephanie Snyder City of Chula Vista City MIl~'1 Office 276 Fourth Avenue Chuta Vista, CA 91910 Dear Stephanie: Thank you for your letter dated September 14, 1993 regardini a mquest for proposals for consultant services to prepare a proposal seeking alternative waste lIUU1IIement and disposal services. As you know, ODD is very interested to provide the DeCeS!UU'Y consulting services to the City of Chula Vista, and other cities who may decide to join into a subregional area. Per your request,. please find attached an outline of assistance and fee estimate. The enclosed estimate assumes the RFP task would be for only the City of Chula Vista. . There would be incremental cost increases to these estimates for addina other cities. Th8 amount of incremental cost would depend upon (8) the number of cities added, and (b) the timing of when added. Please note that the RFP ODD would prepare would include all the items listed in your General . Scope of Work and otherS as necessary to have a complete procurement package. \ I The time 3Cbedule for conducting the procurement could be as follows: :rISk Description Months to Complete 1 RFP RFP Response Period Evaluation NegotiationcCollection AgreCment 2 2 1 lto2 . 1 to 2, start after RFP released, i.e., after Month 2 2 2 3 Ove.rall, a six- to seven-month period is ~ to complete the procurement process, once a consultant agreement is executed and authoriratfon to proceed is received. Gershman. Brickner & Brotton. Inc. 2735 Hanlond Road Foll$ ChurGh. Virginiu 22043.3537 (/031573,5800 FAX 170316Q8-1306 Printed o. tacv<1<d Papor )i/_JJ:; , SEP-17-'93 FRI 15:48 ID:GBB FALLS CHURCH TEL 1'10:7133-698-13136 1:1329 P132 Ms. Stcpbanie Snyder 'City of ChuJa Vista September 17. 1993. Pase 2 In COIlsiderin& OBB for Ibis very impodanl aBiIJ'lment, plalle refer to the information submitted previously coaeeming our capabilities. AdditionaDy. please bep in mind. that OBB is providing similar assistance to tile North County. Solid Waste Management A,ency, and as a result has Pined an important UDdentanding to apply to tile Chula ViJta. situation. TbaDk you in advance for YQUl" consideration of GBB's raources. HWG:jcs /L/-3? . SEP-17-'93 FRI 15:49 ID:GBB FALLS CHURCH TEL NO:703-698-1306 t:t329 P03 OUTLINE OF ASSlSTANCE FOR THE CITY OF CBVLA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Detetiption Fee Emma" CI} 1. Prepare Request for Proposals 1.1 Review City BackgIOund Information $7,000 1.2 Conduct Briefing/Worksbop for Council 5,000 1.3 Issue Draft RFP 6,000 1.4 Issue Final RFP 2,000 2. Assist in Conducting Procurernent Process Activities 2.1 P:re-Proposal Conference and Questions and Answers 3,500 2.2 Evaluation 10,000 2.3 Negotiation Assistance 20,000 3. Assist in Nqotia!ing Changes to Collection 'Contl1ictor Agreement 10,000 OBB - September 17, 1993 ;Lj-32/ l ROBERT A. SMITH 590 B Telegraph Canyon RD Chula Vista, CA 92010 (619)482-0387 SUMMARY OF EXPERI ENCE Currentl y an I nvestigator for th unsecured division of the County of San Diego Tax Co 11 ecto r s Offi ce . Past employment as a private and thi rd party collector and as a retail manager with the G,H. Bass Company. Past experience as a manager wlth FieldcrestlCannon, Associates Fi nancial Services Company of Anzona. Past employment i ncl udes management positions with the Ki nney Shoe Corporation and Mervyn's Department Stores. TECHNICAL fLEXI BI LITY Strong sk1l1s 1n the areas of collections, taxat1on,investigatlons,retail merchand1s1ng, payroll, sales, staffi ng, employee trai ni ng and disC1 pli ne, and cost control. EXPERI ENCE 8/90- present San Diego County Tax Collectors Offlce. F1eld Investigator. 1990- 08/90 ProgresslVe Management Services. 1989 - 0 1/90 G,H. Bass 4474 Camino De La Plaza, San Ysidro, CA 92073 Manager. Full charge management psoition i ncl udi ng payroll control, sales, staffi ng, visual merchandisi ng and cost control, Responsi ble for the security of store, correspondence and communications with corporate offices and bank reeo nci 1 i ati 0 ns. 1989 F1eldcrest/Cannon 2050 S, Roslyn Place, Mesa, AZ 85020 Manager. Full charge manager with the same responsiblities as llsted above. Addltlonal dut1es ; ncl uded the balanc; ng and creation of purchase orders, and the processing of purchase orders from home offlce /t,4, ,i ( () Robert A. Smith Page 2 EXPERI ENCE (cont.) 1989 Greentree Acceptance Corp. Collector of deli nQuent mobile home accounts. Duties i ncl uded heavy customer contact, problem solvi ng, ski p traci ng of accounts, collection of payments, computerized documentation, 1011ow- up, and field collections. 1989 AVAC Same responsi bilities as listed above. 1985 - 1989 Assoclates Fi nancial Services Senior Asslstant Manager Duties included consumer lendlng, sollcltat!On, documentation, credlt investigation, approval and denials, examlnation of f,nancial statements, declsion making "11th regard to credit l1mlts, mortgage banklng, title searching, Hen investlgatlon, insurance sales, also collectlon duties. 1983 - 1985 Stylco Shoe Corp. Manager. Same dutles as full charge manager for retail chai ns 1981 - 1983 Mervyn's Department Store Department Manager. Same duties as llsted above for retail chai ns 1~4-, .,5" MEMORANDUM r September 20, 1993 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council John D. Goss, City Manager/'} Chris Salomone, Community ~evelopment Director [~S , VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: City Sponsorship of Tijuana Merchant's Seminar and Tour BACKGROUND At the September 7, 1993 City Council meeting, Mr. Patrick Osio, Jr., CEO of Cohen, Osio, Perman & Associates, Inc. (COPA), requested that the City of Chula Vista co-sponsor a program to provide local merchants a tour of Tijuana shopping centers and department stores and a related merchandising seminar. COP A is a San Diego-based consulting firm that specializes in U.S./Mexico relations in the areas of transportation, marketing, government affairs and manufacturing. Council requested that staff return with clarification regarding: 1) program content and timeframes; 2) specifically, what assistance COPA is requesting from the City; and, 3) any potential liability for the City (including as relates to the use of the City logo) The information requested is provided below: 1. Cohen. Osio. Perman & Associates. Inc. (COPA) - Company Profile COPA was incorporated in August 1992 by its 3 principals who bring expertise in educational and consulting areas, including regional government affairs, transportation, environmental, manufacturing, marketing, publishing and writing. COP A offers services in areas including bi- national marketing and business strategic planning, and bi-national business development. COP A has developed a series of conferences and seminar/tours to bring business people from Southern California to Tijuana, Baja California. COPA's first event was held in October 1992 in conjunction with the South San Diego County Economic Development Council. The full-day Tijuana seminar/tour was attended by 123 business people and financially sponsored by attorneys, accountants, bankers and real estate developers. In January 1993 COP A offered a forum on Transborder Environmental issues, attended by 400 people. The Mayor of Tijuana and Mayor Nader endorsed and addressed this event. Other events have included a tour for a class of the UCLA School of Extended Studies and an event for the Construction Industry Federation. (Note: COP A is currently under contract to Chula Vista on the Twin Ports Airport issue). I~h ~I , . ., Honorable Mayor and City Council September 20, 1993 Page Two '" ~ 2. Proposed Program The proposed program has been designed to acquaint Chula Vista merchants with their competition south of the border, as well as to educate them regarding pricing structures, appropriate media and markets. Superintendent Joe Conte, Southwestern College, has agreed to participate. COP A will take the merchants to commercial centers and stores; brief them on their competition; introduce advertising media and related demographics, etc. ' COPA has indicated that they need 8 weeks lead time from confirmation of the City's endorsement to hold the event. They wish to expedite the process to ensure merchants can benefit prior to the Christmas season. 3. Chula Vista Assistance/Potential Liability COP A is not requesting financial or City staff support. .' Funding is obtained from financial sponsors other than Southwestern College or Chula Vista (costs are covered by these contributions and ticket sales). COPA would like the City's endorsement and/or use of the City logo. In either case, the promotional brochure will be provided to the City for review and approval prior to printing. Regarding liability, the City Attorney's office has indicated that an endorsement and/or use of the logo should be conditioned upon execution of a simple agreement in which COP A agrees to: 1) save, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Chula Vista from any liability arising from the COPA program, 2) identify Chula Vista as an additional co-insured per the City's standard contractual requirements. 4. Benefits to Chula Vista The positive benefits to the City's merchants and hence to the City's economic base and revenues are potentially very significant. According to COPA, Tijuana residents spend some $2.6 billion annually in San Diego county. The proposed program could help Chula Vista businesses capture a higher percentage of those sales. Additionally, $10.00 of the $46.00 ticket salesprice is earmarked for the (non-financial) co-sponsors. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council endorse the project and require that such endorsement be made contingent upon execution by COP A of a letter agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and City Manager as outlined above. Such an endorsement would also be based upon the understanding that no financial or staff support will be provided. A:\TITOUR.MEM DYE4 PUBLIC POLICY: Judge Laura Hammes, ADAPT Justice systems Committee, Subcommittee Chair for Schools, Gangs, Drugs, and Violence presented the results of two workshops to address schoo~ gangs and violence. Committee members and those attending concluded that the following issues needed to be addressed: (1) School principals are devoting a significant amount of time to the problem of gangs, drugs and violence in schools; (2) There is increasing pressure from parents for principals to protect children from the threat of gangs in schools; (3) Gang activity begins in elementary school and not enough attention is focused by the system on the early stages of gang involvement; and, (4) Principals are not given adequate information concerning gang members and other students who have already been committed to probation in juvenile court for violations of criminal law. Additionally, principals, most often, are unaware of the conditions of probation. ,...-- ,.........". l /" e ~I CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH ID: SEP 16'93 10:16 No.004 P.Ol RESOLUTION NO. 93- 4284 A RESOLUTION OF' THE CITY COUNCIL OF mE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACD, CALIFORNIA PROCLAIMING TilE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO. DIE DISCHARGE OF RAW SEWAGE ACROSS mE INTERNATIONAL BORDER WHEREAS, the City ManagcrJ as Director of Emergency Services of the City of Imperial Beach does hereby find that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of penons and propm1y have arisen within said CitYJ caused by upwards of fifteen million (ISJOOOJOOO) gall~ns of contaminants and raw sewage flowing daily across the international border; and . WHBRBASJ pursuant to Section 8558(c) of the California Government CodcJ the flow of this renegade sewage is beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment and facilities of the City of Imperial Beach; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.52.060 of the Imperial Beach Municipal Code, the City Manager of tbe City of lmperial'Beach has requested the City Council to proclaim the existence of a local emergency; and WHEREAS, these contaminants and raw sewage arc causing contamination of the Tijuana River ValJey and the water and beaches of the City of Imperial Beach threatening the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Imperial Beach as well as visitors to our beaches; and , WHBREAS, tbe contamination of the waters and beaches has resulted in financial loss and closing of local businesses; and. WHBREAS, tbe contamination of the waters and beacbes has resulted 1D tlnancJallOSS and closing of local businesses; and WHEREAS, the flow of contaminants and raw sewage continues to escalate due to increased water' availability and use and lack of adequate infrastructure in the City of Tijuana; and WHEREAS, this flow is the acknowledged responsibility of the federal governments of .the Vnitcd States and Mex.ico; and / ~ -r ~ I CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH ID: SEP 16'93 10:17 No.004 P.02 Resolution No. 93- 4284 Page 2 WHBRBAS. the International Boundary and Water Commission and the United States Environmental Protection Agel'lCJ are coordinating both interim and long term measum to provide for the treatment and disposal 0( this raw sewage; and WHEREAS. the City of San Diego desiring to assist state and federal agencies In expediting treatment of this international sewage to protect its citizens from existinl harm and pOtcDtial disease have proclaimed a Local P..mergenc1 and the County 01 San Diego hu issued a County Proclamation of Local Emergency; and WHBRBAS. this condition constitutes an economic and public health threat which wammta and necessitates the proclamation and existence of a local emergency. NOW. mBRBFORB, BB IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City oflmperia1 Beach that a local emergency now exists throughout the City of Imperial Beach; and DB IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED that this proclamation be forwarded to tho Governor of California with the rcqu~ that he proclaim the City of Imperial Beach to be in a . state of emergency pursuant to Section 862S(b) of the California Government Code.. PASSBD. APPROVEl> AND ADOPTBD by the City Council of Imperial Beach at the regular meeting held this ISth day of September, 1993, by the following roll call vote: AYBS: COUNCJLMBMBERS:: roBTHE, fP.SKlNS, rosB, ramINS, ~'MlT.~ NaBS: COUNCILMnMBnas: R>NE ABSENT: COUNClLMBMBERS: !DNE MICHAEL B. BIXLER, MAYOR ATrEST: CYNTHIA M. TJARKS, CITY CLERK ~~ ~o-~ ,,\\? J l/,f.,:1. CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH ID: SEP 16'93 11:29 No.OOS P.Ol CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH STAFF REPORT 'ftTLE: DATEI PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR S&rI'llil\DBR 15. 1m 1U: em COUNCIL JIIl()M: . Co DA VlD BWJNG ~ V SUBJECTa BESOL1JTJON PKOCLA.IMING mE EXISTENCE 01' A LOCAL EMERGBNCY RElATING TO TBB DISCHARGE 01' RAW SEWAGE ACROSS 1BB INTBBNATlONAL BORDER Staff ."""meadtltlon: Adopt R.eIolutloa No. 93- emerceacy in the City of Impodal Beach. plUClatmin. the existenco of a local .... ~~I None. DIsm"oQ: Con~ts ~ raw. ~ ,from the City of Tijuana, Mexico ate ftowtna across the IntemationaJ border mto tho 'nJuanl River "alley and tho Tijuana River and ... contamlnatinC dao waten and ' '-cheI of Imperial u.cJa. .c . y. l1juma'lleWII&c system I. atumted and the amount 01 sewace entertna thelr treatment tysleDl b incnuina as new connection. .... made to the system., fUrther. the i~ availabiDIy aod ". of water ... cscaIa-.l tho flow of IOWIp aeroa tho bolder. '.,.. / With the City of njuana treatinl -WIle' to tilt maximum capacity of their .yltem. and also traIlSferrin& 13 minion gallons a day of lCWIIe to the San Dieao PI. Lorna plant for treatmr:nt. illl, estimated tbat over I' mWion aalloa. a day (MOD) of contaminatod watel. and scwaao uo flowift, claD)' acmu the int.ematlona1 border. - k,,' ,.;.,. nl. sU\WlOft bas caused the c1osln, of beachel'in the CUy, Joss of tourist trade and ftIIancla11o... aacS dosIft& of businessea. n.e contaminated water end ~ also pose a thfellt to tbe publio health and safety of Imr:rial Beach Midents and vial... 'lbil situation is beyond the control of the ~kes, personnel, and equipment and faciHtIeI of the City. The Commissioner of tho Iotemational Bounduy and Water Commbsion has indicated that hlI apncy and tho United SIateI BavironmeDtaI Protection Aleney are aJOrdinatinl both interim and Ion. teIm measureI to provido lor tho tratmeftt and dbpolll of this raw -waco. Tho tntemadonal Trealmeftt Plant will nOt _<eompJetecl until 1998. at which time the flow cI ... II exl*tecS to bo approxlmatoly 75 MOD. 'Ibo City QII only ~pect an InCle8led tIueat to public health_ < safely untoalmmediatc .. are takca to provide an Intelim solution for b'eatIitI and dllpOSla, of tho TiJuana aowap. I~ f--:J . "~'~"__'~'_"____'~"~~_'''' . .., ,_ '. .~,.~_~,"_"_..w_d~__.~_,",,""""_""'____"_____'_""'_"" -_.,_....,_.",.._._~_.... SO CNTY BRO OF SUPRVRS TEL No.619-SS7-402S Sep 16.93 14:06 No.008 P.Ol COUNTY OJ' SA1f DIEGO PltOCLNIA'tIOH OJ' EXXSTENCB OJ' A LOCAL BKBRGBHcY UD IlBSOLU1'IOM ItBQVB8'1'ING GOVERNOR TO PROCLA:IK A STATZ OJ' BHBRGENCY (page 1 of Z) nERDS, ordinanca No. 8183 or the county ot San Diego empowers the Chief Administrative Officer, as the Director of' Emer90ney Services, to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a 10cal emergency when said county is aftected or 11kely to be affected by a pUblic calaalty, and when tho Board of Supervisors is not in session; and WBBRBAS, the Director ot Emergency Services of the 'County ot! San Diego does hereby find that oonditions ot extreme peri1 to the safety of persons and property ha.ve arisen wit.hin said coun~y, caused by upwards ot ~i~teen lIlillion (15,000,000) gallons of' contaminants and raw sewage flowing daily across the inter-national border into the city of San Diego; and WBERBA8, the raw sewage causes contamination of the Tijuana River valley and the surrounding beaches, thereby threatening the health, safety and welfa;e;ot the citizens of San Diego, and WBBR~8, this flow has recently escalated due to increased water availability and u~e:in the City of Tiju~nai and . WHEREAS, this flow ls,the acknowledged responsibility of the fedoral governments of the'united States and Mexico; and WHEREAS, the International Boundary and Water COmmission and the United States Enviro~ental protection Agency are coordinating both interim and long term measures to provide for the treatment and disposal of this raw,sewage; and WHEREAS, the county.' and City of San D1ogo both desire to assist stat.e and federal 'agencies in expediting treatment of this international sSl',.,age~o protect San Diego County ci.tizens fro. ~xistln9 harm and potential disease; and ..' WBUEAS, pursuant ~f> Section 8558 (c) of the California GoverlU'llent Coc:le, the tlQ~" of this rGnogade sewage is beyond the control of the services, pe~sonnel, equipment and facili.ties of San Diego County; and WHBJlEAS, the Board o~.. supervisors or the county of San Diego is not in session and cannot immediately be called into session; and ., WHEREAS, this condition constitutes an economic and pub~ic health threat which warrants and necessitates the proclamation or ~he existence of a localie,mergency; ,. , I"..p.,r SD CNTY BRD OF SUPRVRS TEL NO.619-557-4025 Sep 16.93 14:06 No.008 P.02 COUftY 0.. SO DIEGO taROCLAIIAT:IOJl 0'1 UXSTBlfCB OF .a. LOCAL BKERGBIICY UD llBSOLUT:IOll azgUSSTXNG GOVBRNOR m PRocu];K A STATZ 0'1 BHBRGElfCY (Page 2 of 2) NOW, TBBlUD'OU, %~ XS HUBBY PROCLAXIIBD that a loc:a1 emergency now exists in San Diego County; and IT %8 :paUD PROCLAXHBD um ORDERBD that during the existence of said 100a1 emergency the powers, functions, and duties of the Director of Emergency Services and the emergency organization of the county sha11 be those prescribed by state law, and by. San Diego County Emergency Plan approved by the Board ot Supervisors on November 20, 1990. ':1-5' :IT IS '-t1RDBR ORDERED that a copy ~f this proc1amation be forwarded to the Governor of Calitornia with the request that he proclaim the County of San Diego to be in a state ot emergency pursuant.to Section 8625(b) ot the Calitornia Government Code. IT .:IS FURTBBR ORDERED that the Governor of California be requested to provide any"aval1able state and Federal aid that may be available to help alle~iate this emergency condition. j -. %" %8 J'tJRTUBR ORDERED that a copy of tt11s deo1aration be forwarded to the Director of the California Governor's Office ot Emergenoy Services. Dated: ? /1/23 1'. ~, '".'! ,) :. . of" i' .J: L 1. -I'"~ -; J ,~... ,-.. I." :1 ; i~ t., ~ -... : .... i1. --1J"f-1, ~~~ .... ,.J..