Rural Waste Collection Options Department of Budget and Management 01/21/2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Waste Prevention Whats Working Whats Challenging.
Advertisements

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/EDUCATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE COLLECTION: Advertise collection service Notify citizens of special collections of bulky items.
Remaining Landfill Life in Years (updated 2009)
Y OUR PARTNER IN WASTE EXPENSE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING MANAGEMENT SERVICES Good for the environment and your bottom line!
The Dorset Waste Partnership Louise Bryant Service Development Manager.
12/19/05 Finance Committee Framing Statements & Conclusions.
Board Workshop – September 5, Bid Considerations The three main factors to consider when developing this bid are: Level and Quality of Service Low.
Pay-As-You-Throw Boiler Green Initiative (BGI) EPICS.
San Juan County Solid Waste: Funding. Solid Waste Funding Current Solid Waste Revenue Current Solid Waste Revenue Rate Structure used to collect revenue.
What are the sources of revenue for Solid Waste Management? Does the county have a franchise fee for haulers? Is it a flat fee? Does the county charge.
Building a Recycling Program Through Innovation and Creativity instead of Big Budgets Financial Sustainability – Recycling in the City.
Albuquerque Recycling Now & In the Future Mayor Martin J. Chávez __ Ed Adams, P.E., Chief Administrative Officer Irene García, Chief Operations Officer.
KY Dept. for Environmental Protection 2013 – 2017 Five Year Update KY Division of Waste Management Statewide Solid Waste Planning and Recycling Workshop.
Keep America Beautiful, Inc.
Cabinet designated solid waste official planning and management agency -- Statewide solid waste reduction and management plan -- Annual reports.
1 Bringing Curbside Recycling to Delaware A Proposal by: The Recycling Public Advisory Council (RPAC) The Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA) The Department.
1 WASTE TIRE PROGRAM Utilities Department Orange County Board of County Commissioners April 30, 2013.
1 Waste Tire Program Utilities Department Orange County Board of County Commissioners March 8, 2011.
San Juan County Solid Waste Program Rate Workshop 12/10/02.
SCRAP TIRE BUY-BACK PROGRAM. Montgomery County: 535,000 residents 28 cities and townships City of Dayton largest jurisdiction member (141,000 residents)
City of Loveland Solid Waste Division Diversion Versus Disposal: Determining the Costs Diversion Versus Disposal: Determining the Costs.
February 23, 2011 Charles G. Cooper, Banking Commissioner Texas Department of Banking.
Westford’s Current Solid Waste Program Total costs in FY10 : $1.56 million Trash collection contract with ACME Waste Systems until August 2010 at annual.
2004 Budget Presentation City Commission Budget Study Session July 2, 2003.
Sustainable Materials Recovery Program Municipal Grant Program Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
Collection Service Procurement Orange County Florida Caroline Mixon Project Manager ( Now Deputy Director, City of Tampa Solid Waste Department) 4/30/02.
Department of Public Works Non-Exclusive Solid Waste Collection Franchise System – Review April 28, 2014.
LBA ASSOCIATES 2003 Colorado SWANA Annual Mtg CO SOLID WASTE SURVEY  By LBA Associates (with CAFR)  Collected 2002 program data  Disclaimer – quality.
California Venue and Event Recycling Legislation Review of AB 2176 Model Ordinance For Waste Reduction at Venues and Events.
Laura J. Weber President The Lydia Company Serving our clients to build a better tomorrow.
“Keeping your money in your pocket, where it belongs.” Chart of Accounts Update Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers - New Clerk Academy March 13, 2014.
Town of Plymouth Solid Waste Management Town of Plymouth Department of Public Works November 26, 2012.
1 2 nd Informal Workshops on Draft Revisions to the Disposal Reporting System Regulations June 24, Diamond Bar June 26, Sacramento.
California Integrated Waste Management Board March 16, 2004 San Jose, CA City of San Jose Diversion Programs.
Department of Solid Waste Management FY11 Budget Update Mayor’s Report Harry J. Hayes, Director January 19, 2011.
Focused Workshop on the Informal Draft Revised Disposal Reporting System Regulations Session #1 March 2003.
Illegal Dumping Prevention MWMA - April Drivers Special handling requirements Landfill bans Cost Lack of convenient & affordable disposal options.
MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS BILL September LEGISLATION n Municipal Demarcation Act, 1998 n Municipal Structures Act, 1998 n Municipal Systems Bill (1999)
REVISED DISPOSAL REPORTING & ADJUSTMENT METHOD REGULATIONS 14 CCR Sections et. seq. 14 CCR Section CCR Section
Local Jurisdiction Adoption of Construction & Demolition Ordinances Local Assistance & Market Development July 11,
County and Municipal Solid Waste Programs in Colorado David Snapp Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
Performing Hospital Waste Audits Presented by Peggy Harlow, WM Healthcare Solutions, Inc. April 2, 2012.
Defeasance of the Solid Waste System Refunding Revenue Bonds Series 2003 Orange County Board of County Commissioners Meeting September 18, 2007 Defeasance.
1 Waste Tire Program Utilities Department Orange County Board of County Commissioners October 18, 2011.
Solid Waste – Exclusive Commercial Franchise P RESENTATION TO B OARD OF C OUNTY C OMMISSIONERS M ARCH 30, 2010 S PECIAL M EETING.
University of Minnesota Internal\External Sales “The Internal Sales Review Process” An Overview of What Happens During the Review.
9/15/031 Fort Collins, Colorado “ Pay as You Throw” Trash Rates
Utilities Department June 26, 2007 Mandatory Refuse & Recycling Collection Services Tentative 2008 MSTU.
A Division of the Department of Environmental Serviceswww.HamiltonCountyRecycles.org HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM.
2011/12 State Citizens’ Options for Public Safety (COPS) Program Public Hearing December 6, /12 State Citizens' Options for Public Safety (COPS)
Outreach for the On-Call Hazardous Waste Site Investigation and Design Services Contract Caltrans D9 February 17, 2016.
FEBRUARY 22, 2016 FY 2017 County Administrator’s Recommended Budget.
1. FY Proposed Budget Jamie Justice, Town Manager & Piet Swart, Finance Director April 26, 2016 Fiscal Year Proposed Budget 2.
Presented By: Budget & Research Department Karen Rhodes-Whitley FY STATUS REPORT & THREE-YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST SUMMARY FISCAL YEARS
2010/11 State Citizens’ Options for Public Safety (COPS) Program Public Hearing November 2, /11 State Citizens' Options for Public Safety (COPS)
Local Assistance Section GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING THE AREA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 5-Year Update Solid Waste Coordinator Training FEBRUARY.
Town of Bethlehem Dan Rain, Recycling Coordinator.
Solid Waste Study Board of County Commissioners March 20, 2012 Orange County.
1 REFUSE AND RECYCLING STUDY COLLECTION ALTERNATIVES AND COST COMPARISONS May 18, 2009.
Pasco County “Budget 101” OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET.
Before We Talk Trash: Introduction of Elected Officials and City Staff
Waste-To-Energy Public/Private Partnership Legal Issues
City and County of Broomfield Solid Waste Task Force
Non-Exclusive Solid Waste Franchise Renewals
Mecklenburg County Solid Waste FY 2018.
Proposed 2018 Budget Truth In Taxation Hearing December 5, 2017
October 11, 2011 City Council Meeting Robert Layton City Manager
Regional Solid Waste Grants Program
Utilities Department Solid Waste Business Plan and Tipping Fees
Highlights of Changes to Waste Collection Requirements (2015 )
Presentation transcript:

Rural Waste Collection Options Department of Budget and Management 01/21/2014

Initial Sanitation Concept Single Exclusive Franchise Agreement – One District /One Vendor to service all rural residents of Hidalgo County Concern Displacement of local haulers Residents have limited choice 2

Modified Sanitation Concept Multiple Exclusive Franchise Agreements Multiple Districts/Multiple Vendors to service all rural residents. (6 Districts) Concern No guarantee of small hauler displacement Choices are still limited 3

Public Hearing 08/27/13 - Public Hearing held to consider public input and commentary regarding the proposed rural solid waste collection program. CC Recommendation Meet with potential vendors to understand their concerns and develop project recommendations 4

RFI Findings 7 Vendors currently service 20,500 rural residents (56,799 total) 36% of rural households are using private haulers 64% are using a transfer station/landfill and/or illegally disposing All haulers interviewed would be willing to pay a 5% franchise fee Vendors willing to operate the transfer stations and submit franchise fees Existing sanitation model is preventing haulers from increasing customer base. Transfer stations remain open to the public 5

Advantages: Identical rate countywide Less vehicular traffic Fewer haulers to monitor Consistent level of service 6

Disadvantages Displacement of small haulers Does not promote competition Residents do not have a choice Difficult for one hauler to service areas with less density due to higher operation costs 7

Advantages Promotes competition Enables all haulers to stay in business Allows rural residents to choose the best options 8

Disadvantages More vehicular traffic Rate may fluctuate depending on hauler selected by rural resident More haulers to monitor 9

Recommendations Based on the RFI’s questionnaire responses and vendor interviews conducted, the following actions are recommended 1.Assess a 5% franchise fee to all waste haulers 2.Assess a fee for disposal service at the citizen collection stations 3.Consider privatizing/franchising or assessing a fee at the citizen collection stations 10

Assess a franchise fee to all waste haulers Utilize Non-Exclusive Franchise Agreements Open Market Concept All Waste Haulers are assessed a 5% franchise fee Competition keeps rates low Under a non-exclusive franchise system, rural county residents will have a choice of more than one waste hauler because the system is open to competition to all haulers that enter into an agreement. The waste haulers deal directly with the public in competing for rural resident customers. Rural residents get to choose the most economical vendor. 11

Assess a fee for disposal service at the citizen collection stations Implement a Pay As You Throw (PAYT) system – Residents pay a variable rate depending on the amount of trash disposed – Fee will be based on volume or weight Options Utilize county staff to assess, collect and operate the transfer stations or; Privatize the transfer stations and collect a franchise fee Under a Pay As You Throw (PAYT) trash program, households are charged for trash disposal based on the amount of trash they throw away, providing a direct economic incentive for residents to reduce waste. Will encourage and initiate recycling efforts 12

Gives rural resident another option to self haul. County would have an option to collect a franchise fee from awarded vendor Or; County can assess a fee for waste disposal at the collection stations 13

Advantages Allows rural residents to choose the best options County keeps control of the Sanitation Functions Encourages competition Closes the trash black market Reduces current M/O expenditures Increases revenues 14

Initial transition and support (illegal dumping) Potential capital costs (scale or visual) Dedicated Code Enforcement (equipment and training) 15

Education and Outreach Available Recycling Options Good Code Enforcement – Code Officer have to be heavily involved – Target known bad areas first – Conduct surveillance and sting operations – Stiffen penalties and repercussions 16

Franchise Implementation Process 1.Present sanitation program options and recommendations to Commissioners Court 2.Draft county sanitation ordinance regarding the franchising of waste haulers 3.Notify affected haulers of planned “franchise“ system program 4.Receive commentary and conduct 2 nd public hearing 5.Draft Non-Exclusive Franchise Agreements 6.Seek Commissioners Court Approval and Authorization of ordinance and agreements 7.Haulers apply for the franchise agreements 8.Commissioners Court issues franchise agreements via Court Action 9.Franchisee send monthly revenue collections report as well as monthly 5% franchise fee 10.Franchisee sends annual report to the county 11.County periodically Audits the Franchisee financial statements (via County Auditor) 17

Assess a 5% Franchise Fee to all the waste haulers in Hidalgo County All vendors remain in business Vendors compete for customers Rural residents choose the best options and rates Keep transfer stations open (2 options) 1.Operated by county personnel Revenues would help offset M/O costs or; Fee would be based on volume or weight 2.Operated by a Private Hauler County would collect an additional 5% Franchise Fee Qualified employees could be absorbed by the private vendor Rural residents not willing to contract can still self haul 18

Free Trash Collection is no economically feasible to County or Haulers By assessing a fee at the transfer stations, resident choose what’s more beneficial Rural residents will be able to pay a smaller fee when they self haul by segregating trash and thus take less to the collection station. County will encourage recycling Haulers will find themselves with more residents on the open market looking for waste p/u thus encouraging more business Revenue stream over M/O could be used to offset cost attributed to Public Awareness, Clean-Up, Code Enforcement and other initiatives 19

 By modifying our current sanitation functions and responsibilities, Hidalgo County will be encouraging economic development, helping to reduce fiscal deficits and encouraging environmental awareness 20

21