2002-04-16 Regular CC MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY- -APRIL 16, 2002- -7:30 P.M.
Mayor Appezzato convened the Regular Meeting at 7:37 p.m.
ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson,
Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5.
Absent: None.
AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
(02 -158) Proclamation declaring April, 2002 as Child Care
Appreciation Month in the City of Alameda.
Mayor Appezzato read the proclamation and presented it to Lonnie
Walker, Director, Woodstock Child Care Development Center; Martha
Lyons, President, Alameda Family Child Care Association; and Leslie
Medine, Home Sweet Home.
Melinda O'Neil, Tiffany Ranish, and Kalie Sanjiyan, students at
Home Base High School, commented on child care needs in the City of
Alameda.
(02 -159) Proclamation declaring April 27, 2002 as Earth Day in the
City of Alameda.
Mayor Appezzato read the proclamation and presented it to Public
Works Environmental Services Administrative Management Analyst.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the Consent Calendar.
Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
[Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding
the paragraph number.]
( *02 -160) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings
held on April 2, 2002. Approved.
( *02 -161) Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications and
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1
April 16, 2002
authorize Call for Bids for Signal and Intersection Modifications
at Atlantic Avenue, Main Street and Pacific Avenue, and at Atlantic
Avenue and Webster Street Project, No. P.W. 07- 01 -21. Adopted.
( *02 -162) Recommendation to approve Cooperative Joint Use Agreement
with the Alameda Unified School District. Accepted.
( *02 -163) Recommendation to accept Quarterly Sales Tax Report for
Period Ending March 31, 2002 for Sales Transactions in the Fourth
Calendar Quarter of 2001. Accepted.
( *02 -164) Resolution No. 13442 "Authorizing Destruction of Certain
Finance Department Obsolete Records." Adopted.
( *02 -165) Resolution No. 13443 "Amending the Management and
Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) Salary Schedule by
Establishing the Salaries for the Classifications of Assistant Line
Superintendent, Electrical Equipment Superintendent, Environmental
Health and Safety Coordinator, Community Development Program
Manager and Assistant City Attorney II." Adopted.
( *02 -166) Ratified bills in the amount of $ 3,080,735.26.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
(02 -167) Recommendation to adopt FY 2002 -03 Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan; adopt Amendment No. 2 to FY 2001 -02
CDBG Action Plan; and authorize negotiation and execution of
related Documents, Modifications and Agreements; and
(02 -167A) Recommendation to approve FY 2002 -03 CDBG Public Service
Funding Allocations. [Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB)]
Paul Lamohan, Alameda, stated Allied Housing is not receiving CDBG
funding; the program provides housing and requires that people be
in training or work programs; that he became an insurance agent
while on the program.
Victor Chavez, Alameda, stated Allied Housing has given him the
motivation and determination to better himself; that he is in a
training program to become a counselor for teenagers; the program
gave his family hope; urged Council to continue funding the
program.
Fredrika Suelter, Alameda, urged Council to continue funding Allied
Housing; stated that she attends school fulltime, works part -time
and is raising two children; that she is an Allied Housing
applicant; the program cares about making people productive
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2
April 16, 2002
citizens; cutting the program will make it hard for people who are
trying to become productive; there is great need for the program.
Ann Johnson, Allied Housing, stated the program cannot make it
without CDBG funding; Alameda County Community Action Program
(ACAP) alone cannot fund the program; the program is thriving in
Alameda; ten families have received subsidized housing and are half
way through the program; urged Council to fund Allied Housing.
Awanya Russell, Allied Housing, stated the Alameda Housing
Scholarship program began about seven months ago; the intensive
program includes an application process, a credit check,
establishing a plan to survive once the scholarship ends and
planning a training program; participants were promised 12 to 24
months subsidy; participants are working, attending school and
trying to do their best to succeed in the City.
The Community Development Manager stated the recommendation is to
continue funding the Allied Housing Scholarship program at $120,000
to continue rent subsidies for the ten individuals currently
enrolled in the program; staff proposes to delay the funding
decision to better understand the budget presented by Allied
Housing; the counseling provided to participants is costly; staff
has been working with Allied Housing to obtain budget information
and understand service levels; the program is wonderful and staff
would like to continue its support; however, staff felt obligated
to understand how the allocation of funds works; more information
has been received from Allied Housing; a budget amount between
$10,000 and $15,000 has been set; there might be money for the
program in the fall; Allied Housing receives ACAP funding and staff
has brokered funding through the Cal Works program and CDBG funds
last year; rather than trying to shift funding, staff would
recommend shifting funding later.
Mayor Appezzato stated staff recommends moving forward tonight,
will continue to review funding for Allied Housing and might come
back with an adjustment in the near future.
The Community Development Manager stated that staff would return to
Council with a reprogramming recommendation, including allocating
additional funds to Allied Housing, in October.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether the Allied Housing's funding
for rental subsidies is going forward, to which the Community
Development Manager responded in the affirmative.
Carol Graywing, Conciliation Forums, thanked the City for
recommending conflict resolution training in the community; noted
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 3
April 16, 2002
the conflict resolution and mediation training would be compatible
with City staff's interest based negotiations training.
Jim Franz, American Red Cross, outlined services provided by the
American Red Cross; requested Council to approve continuation of
funding to allow the Red Cross to continue helping Alamedans in
need.
Ed Dankworth, SSHRB, stated that he was present to withdraw the
SSHRB's letter requesting that Allied Housing be included in the
current CDBG allocation since staff will address the matter in the
future.
Elaine deColiggy, Midway Shelter, thanked staff for recommending
funding for Midway and the SSHRB for supporting the recommendation;
urged Council to approve funding; stated Alameda is a tremendous,
compassionate community; there is tremendous volunteer support,
including donation of dinners; over 50 Alamedans have stayed at the
shelter during the 15 months it has been open; over 200 people have
been served; changes to the shelter have been acknowledged by the
Alameda County Continuum of Care noting that it meets or exceeds
health and safety standards; the Midway Shelter has improved
because of City support, community volunteers and Shelter staff;
the program is being turned into a flagship in the County; the
Shelter can only provide so much at an emergency shelter stay; that
she supports the [Allied Housing] Alameda Housing Scholarship
Program; sometimes people need more than one hand up; the Housing
Scholarship is the second hand that ensures people do not end up
back in Midway.
Mayor Appezzato complimented Ms. DeColingy for running a very good
program.
Vice Mayor DeWitt inquired whether Building Futures for Women and
Children was directly associated with the Shelter.
Ms. DeColingy responded Building Futures is the non - profit
organization, which partners with the Alameda Homeless Network to
run the Shelter; Building Futures operate a shelter in San Leandro
and will operate the shelter at the former Naval Air Station;
Midway is one of four housing programs operated by Building
Futures; Building Futures could not operate without the Network,
which fund - raises and ensures dinners are donated every night.
John Spangler, Alameda, stated non - profits have to fund raise;
people in need should be taken care of; urged the Allied Housing
matter be resolved quickly for the sake of the people in the
program.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 4
April 16, 2002
Councilmember Kerr stated the Homeless Collaborative at the former
Navy Base, which is occupying military housing, has received a
great deal of assistance from the City for infrastructure and
building a new complex; future tax increment money from the City's
redevelopment areas is dedicated to a large housing project; there
is a counseling program and medical clinics; further stated
Sentinel Fair Housing's funding is for counseling in fair housing
and said mission should be understood; that she supports fair
housing.
Councilmember Daysog stated Allied Housing receives $120,000 for a
Housing Scholarship program; the Housing Scholarship program helps
pay for rents; CDBG funding paid for services managed by Allied
Housing; the program has demonstrated success; funding for Allied
Housing should be found; that he serves as the Vice Chair for ACAP;
ACAP has directed grantees, including Allied Housing, to not rely
solely on ACAP funds and to diversify funding sources; providing
$120,000 for rents will mean nothing without offering support
services.
Mayor Appezzato inquired whether ACAP might be able to provide an
additional $20,000 in funding for Allied Housing.
Councilmember Daysog responded ACAP is reviewing ways to increase
funding sources, e.g. PG &E has committed to provide a grant; money
from the State will be partnered with private sector dollars; ACAP
is in the process of being innovative and expanding its revenue
base; organizations which have performed well should be supported.
Mayor Appezzato stated the SSHRB recommends that Council move
forward; Development Services will look for additional funds for
Allied Housing.
Councilmember Johnson stated there are limited funds; almost every
organization will receive less funding than requested; some
requests did not receive any funding; the SSHRB has reviewed the
matter; staff has the responsibility to ensure budgets make sense
before approving funding; the City will work to get more money for
Allied Housing.
Councilmember Johnson moved approval of the staff recommendation.
Councilmember Kerr seconded the motion.
Under discussion, Mayor Appezzato requested the Development
Services Manager to update Council on the status of possible
funding for Allied Housing in the future.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 5
April 16, 2002
Councilmember Daysog stated that he would not support the motion;
there is a policy question about finding funding for organizations
which have produced solid outcomes.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated the SSHRB has reviewed the matter and
hearings were held; there was an opportunity for input; the SSHRB
supports the recommendation; money provided for organizations is
limited.
Mayor Appezzato stated the City received $1.6 Million from the
federal government for CDBG programs; there is never enough
funding; the City will continue to locate funding for Allied
Housing.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor
Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Daysog - 1.
(02 -168) Recommendation to award Contract(s) for Solid Waste
Disposal Services, Solid Waste Collection Services, and Recycling
and Organic Materials Collection and Processing Services; authorize
the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement(s) for these
services; authorize additional staff to support these services; and
authorize the establishment of a Public Services Mitigation Fee.
Mayor Appezzato stated the City of Alameda has funded three
initiatives during the last year and a half: a library bond
initiative, a school initiative and a hospital initiative; budget
considerations show that the City might be able to save $1 Million
per year for five years; Council will consider establishment of a
public service mitigation fee; since the community has supported
quality of life issues, he proposes that the City not accept the
additional money as a mitigation fee and that $1 Million per year
be returned to the citizens of Alameda in reduced waste and
recycling bills; there will be no rate increases for the next two
years; that he suggests money be returned to the citizens in
reduced bills for recycling and garbage.
Councilmember Johnson noted residents also passed a measure to
continue the Utility Users Tax.
The Deputy Public Works Director gave a Power Point presentation
outlining the procurement process and the staff recommendation.
Mayor Appezzato complimented City staff, consultants and citizen
volunteers for their work; stated the Council implemented a
recycling program five years ago; the City is now the number one
City in the County for waste diversion and has exceeded the State
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 6
April 16, 2002
mandate; the City should be proud of its accomplishments.
Councilmember Daysog stated the City Manager and staff suggested
savings be used to address fiscal problems; inquired whether
decision should be delayed to review parameters on the Mayor's
rebate proposition.
Mayor Appezzato stated that he would not withdraw his suggestion;
the savings would be about $50 per family per year; if money is
needed later on, the City should be upfront with the citizens.
Councilmember Daysog stated the savings would be $4.50 per month,
which is a substantial savings; however, there are policy
considerations.
Councilmember Kerr stated Waste Management came in with the lowest
bid; staff recommends hiring an additional City employee using the
mitigation fee; the City spends $770,000 on employee expenses to
deal with the current solid waste and recycling programs; the
additional $130,000 proposed would bring the City's cost up to
$900,000, which seems high.
Mayor Appezzato stated that his suggestion is to rebate the extra
savings after accommodating all expenses, including $130,000 for
new staff.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated the staff report recommendation is to
award the Solid Waste Disposal Contract to Waste Management;
inquired whether said Contract differed from residential pickup.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded in the affirmative;
stated the Disposal Contract provider takes garbage from the
transfer facility to the landfill.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated the staff recommendation is to combine the
[solid waste and recycling pickup] services and award the Contract
to Alameda County Industries (ACI); currently, there is a weekly
pickup of garbage and bi- monthly pickup of recyclables; inquired
whether there would be weekly pickup of recyclables.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded both recyclables and
yard waste would be picked up on a weekly basis.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether recycling for multi - family
and businesses would be required, to which the Deputy City Attorney
responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the City currently has
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 7
April 16, 2002
recycling for businesses.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded the program for
businesses is not mandatory; requiring the program is new.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she supports the idea of offering
recycling for paint and batteries; inquired whether said option was
included in all recycling proposals.
The Deputy Public Works Director stated Waste Management proposed
the program; currently, no other proposal includes said program;
Council could request staff to negotiate for the program.
Councilmember Johnson stated batteries and paint not picked up and
disposed of properly might end up in the garbage; inquired whether
food waste pickup would begin for commercial immediately.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; and
noted that the new contract would begin February 2003.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether proposals include the price
of residential food waste pickup, to which the Deputy Public Works
Director responded in the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember Johnson's inquiry regarding annual
garbage pickup, the Deputy Public Works Director stated the City
would still have annual events; there will be one scheduled
Citywide event in addition to each household calling for a pickup
once a year.
Councilmember Johnson inquired whether the weekly recycling pickup
would be in two trucks or whether there would be a combined
recycling truck.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded that the type of vehicle
depends upon the provider selected; split -body trucks collect both
types of recycling at the same time; Star System trucks [proposed
by Alameda County Industries] require individual [separate] trucks.
Mayor Appezzato called a recess at 9:17 p.m. and reconvened the
Regular Meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Mayor Appezzato stated the rebate should go to residents only - -all
homes and multiple units; commercial businesses should not receive
a rebate; that he supports a rebate of $50 to $60 per resident, to
thank citizens for passing three initiatives over the last two
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 8
April 16, 2002
years.
Councilmembers Daysog stated that he supports the Mayor's [rebate]
idea.
Tom Padia, Alameda County Waste Management Authority, commended the
City of Alameda for the open process; stated there was an
extraordinarily broad review and input process for the very
important contract; the City included a very aggressive and
progressive plan for increased diversion of materials from landfill
to help the County meet the 75% diversion goal by 2010.
Brian Matthews, Alameda County Waste Management Authority,
commended staff on the inclusive process; stated the Authority
supports diversion of commercial and residential food waste to meet
the Countywide 75% diversion goal by 2010; implementing the
residential food waste collection program in a phased approach is
prudent and gives the City and provider an opportunity to adjust
the program for maximum diversion and public acceptance.
Del Blaylock, Alameda, stated ACI, operating as Alameda Recycling,
has supported non - profit organizations in the community, including
the Mayor's 4th of July Parade, the Boys and Girls Club and Meals on
Wheels; the company [ACI] wants to be a part of the City of Alameda
and has done an excellent job; encouraged Council to accept the
City Manager's recommendation and select ACI; thanked ACI for
everything that its done for the charities in Alameda.
Dave MacDonald, Waste Management of Alameda County (WMAC), stated
Waste Management appreciate staff's recommendation to select the
company for the City's waste disposal services; WMAC is
disappointed that it did not receive staff's recommendation for the
combined collection service; the evaluation performed by staff and
others was very close; staff indicated that WMAC was less
competitive in vehicle technology, management allocation,
jurisdiction references, and educational programs; with respect to
vehicle technology, WMAC was considering customers; using only two
trucks per collection in neighborhoods would better serve
customers; with respect to management allocation, WMAC offered a
team of six management employees allocating 15% to 300 of their
time; WMAC would dedicate as much management time as necessary to
ensure Alameda's program was an outstanding success; with respect
to jurisdiction references, WMAC meets with most of its
jurisdictions on a monthly basis to discuss issues; recent surveys
in Alameda indicate a very high level of customer service
satisfaction; with respect to education programs, WMAC has offered
two fulltime people and is prepared to provide an outstanding
education program; Waste Management has been servicing the citizens
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 9
April 16, 2002
of Alameda for over twenty years, has over 60 active and retired
employees living in Alameda and has been a good corporate citizen;
WMAC would like to continue servicing Alameda customers.
Bill Stalman, Alameda, commented on the high quality of Waste
Management employees.
Doug Linney, Alameda, stated that he served as Chair of the City's
Solid Waste Recycling Task Force twelve years ago; Alameda has a
proud tradition of a high recycling rate; an important component of
the next phase of recycling is the food waste program; Norcal is
the only company with the knowledge, experience and which is fully
permitted to start handling food waste; Norcal is the leader in the
field of food waste composting; complimented staff on doing a great
job reviewing the proposals; stated however, the best technical and
overall service proposal, which is Norcal, was not recommended; the
primary reason was the issue of cost; a recycling contract should
emphasize the diversion rate; Alameda should have the best service
and best waste diversion rate, which would be provided by Norcal at
a lower price than current services; urged Council to select
Norcal.
Jack Bertram, Alameda, stated Waste Management has demonstrated
social responsibility; when the Rotary Club of Alameda held a fund
raising Crab Feast on the Hornet, Waste Management provided a 20-
yard dumpster at no cost after only a phone call; Waste Management
has demonstrated its commitment to citizens; Waste Management
offered battery and paint disposal.
Mayor Appezzato noted Alameda County Waste Management Authority has
a facility that collects hazardous waste, such as oil, paint and
batteries on the Embarcadero; however, curb pickup would be
advantageous.
Justine Livingston, Alameda, stated Waste Management pickup service
has been perfect; that she has never had a problem; drivers are
extremely friendly and are always the same people; drivers patrol
the streets while picking up garbage; Alameda Recycling always has
different drivers; that she has never had a problem with Waste
Management's billing; Alameda Recycling doubled her fee a year ago;
she complained and wrote numerous letters; Alameda Recycling never
answered the phone or responded to her letters and turned her over
to a collection agency; her bill finally dropped down to zero, but
after a couple of months she was billed double again; urged Council
to retain Waste Management's good service.
Jon Spangler, Alameda, stated that he appreciates the thoroughness
of the presentation and the work done by City staff; that he is
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 10
April 16, 2002
looking forward to upping the diversion percentage at his house;
that he agrees with the payment structure recommended by staff;
City programs should not be put at risk to make recycling and
garbage bills a little smaller; people should have to pay for what
they throw away, whether it is recycled or put in the trash; urged
Council to maintain the staff recommendation.
Soledad Alberto, Golden Gate Disposal, stated that he is an Alameda
resident and an employee of Norcal; Norcal is very dedicated to
servicing the people of San Francisco; Alameda should have the same
experience.
John Glaub, Norcal Waste Systems, stated Alameda would receive
extra services with Norcal at costs less than current rates; all
proposals were below current rates; there is flexibility to save
money and at the same time select the best service; with Norcal,
the City would get the highest diversion of materials from
landfill, rather than the lowest; diversion quantities are
contractual commitments with financial penalties, not just
estimates without any consequences; Norcal is the only all -union
proposal and does not use non -union processing facilities to lower
costs; Norcal is the national leader in food waste collection and
composting and has a fully - permitted composting facility which is a
leading food waste composting facility in the State of California;
Norcal would provide a full -time management team for the City of
Alameda, including a full -time General Manager and a full -time
Customer Service Manager; Norcal would become a local company
locating five customer service personnel and two public- outreach
personnel in the City of Alameda; one outreach person would be
dedicated entirely to the commercial sector and one to residential,
including multi - family; based on Norcal's experience, said staffing
level would be necessary to make the food waste collection program
successful; the new contract requires providing electronic bill
payment, or e- payment; Norcal has a well- established electronic
payment system that has been in operation for several years and was
even featured in a New York Times newspaper article; Norcal earned
the highest level of satisfaction reported by the jurisdiction
served; urged Council to provide residences and businesses with
additional environmental and customer service benefits available
from Norcal at cost below current rates.
Michael Sangiacomo, Norcal Waste Systems, stated Norcal is 100% -
employee -owned and is the only service provider proposing an all -
union workforce; although the cost is about 12.5% to 15% higher,
staff recommends using Waste Management's disposal facility because
the facility is environmentally superior to the alternative;
however, staff's sound reasoning [selecting an environmentally
superior provider] did not apply to collection and diversion
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 1 1
April 16, 2002
services; Norcal's proposal to the City of Alameda offers the best
solid waste collection and diversion services; the staff report
states: " Norcal has the best overall service proposal;" Norcal's
service far exceeds the requirements contained in the RFP; the
staff report also states: " Norcal had the strongest technical
proposal;" Norcal's proposal is built on aggressive diversion
services; Norcal's experience is unmatched for the three -key
diversion initiatives: 1) food waste pickup would be available for
all residences and businesses beginning the first day of service;
2) an aggressive commercial recycling program would be offered; and
3) a multi - family service plan would be included; food waste
recyclingwill be the most fundamental change to solid waste
services over the next ten years; Norcal is the leader in food
waste recycling in the country and has been collecting and
recycling food waste for five years; most other companies do not
provide said service; the staff recommended a service provider with
no experience and with a compost facility that is not permitted to
accept food waste; Council has the choice of going with a
demonstrated leader or taking the risk with an inexperienced
service provider; urged Council to choose the best for the
environment.
Ann Reno, Alameda, urged Council to vote to retain Waste Management
as the City's service provider; stated Waste Management has
provided stellar service to the City of Alameda; many employees and
retirees of Waste Management reside in Alameda; Waste Management
employees go the extra step to take garbage piles next to
overflowing garbage cans and wait for people rushing to bring out
garbage at pickup time; Waste Management dedicates itself to
providing the community with the best possible service; Waste
Management has adjusted routes to keep noise levels at a minimum
and adjusted routes to assist with traffic issues; Waste Management
is actively involved in organizations such as Alameda Meals on
Wheels, Boys and Girls Club, and the Park Street Art and Wine Fair;
Waste Management got to be the leader in residential garbage
collection in the United States by being actively involved in the
community; polls taken throughout the City indicate 680 of the
community wants to keep Waste Management.
Eric Horton, Republic Services, commended staff, consultants and
members of the Solid Waste Franchise Team for professionalism,
diligence and hard work throughout the process; stated Republic
Services would give back $8.5 to $18 million to the City of Alameda
in its disposal proposal; Republic Services was the recommended
[disposal] service provider at all meetings, until the staff report
was published last week; that he delivered a letter to Council with
a recap of Republic's proposal to date identifying the approximate
$8.5 million savings and an alternate proposal; the alternate
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 12
April 16, 2002
proposal could save an additional $10 million; inquired how Council
could deprive the Alameda residents of said savings.
John Sullivan, Castro Valley, stated that he operates a large
apartment complex on Shoreline Drive as well as apartment complexes
in downtown San Leandro, which is serviced by ACI; his experience
with ACI has been very, very positive; ACI's drivers are courteous
and understanding, and office staff is responsive; that he highly
recommends ACI; his apartment complex in Alameda is exempted from
green waste services because the professional landscaping company
hauls away green waste; food waste could be handled in the same
manner; requested that no changes be made with regard to offering
exemptions if the goal of diverting material from landfill is
occurring.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether Mr. Sullivan's apartments have
garbage disposals, to which Mr. Sullivan responded in the
affirmative.
Councilmember Kerr inquired what the minimum charge would be for
green waste and food waste; stated staff indicated the charge would
not be by apartment; inquired how people would be charged.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded there would be a charge
by complex; owners can opt to charge by unit; staff does not have
the rates because the provider has not been chosen yet; rates will
differ based on Council's selection; food waste is not just food,
it is any contaminated paper material such as pizza boxes and
tissues; almost everything that is now put in garbage cans becomes
a food waste; food waste put down the garbage disposal ends up as
sludge, which is a disposed product; food waste should end up at
the composting facility to become fertilizer.
Mayor Appezzato stated that although he has a garbage disposal, he
has a compost bin which he uses for food waste; everybody should
not opt out; waste will be diverted because Alameda does not have a
garbage dump; other cities do not want Alameda's garbage; the City
needs to reach 75% diversion.
Gary Keep, Norcal Waste Systems, stated that he is an Alameda
resident and works in the commercial recycling department at Golden
Gate Disposal; that he has managed small business hazardous waste
disposal and a wide variety of other recycling- related jobs; the
current provider has been doing a fine job; however, Norcal can do
a better job; Norcal has a lot of experience with both food waste
and composting; Norcal has a great package to offer.
Tom Guarino, San Leandro Chamber of Commerce, stated the staff
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 13
April 16, 2002
presentation was very comprehensive and helpful; ACI and Waste
Management are both members of the San Leandro Chamber; both
companies are outstanding members, very good corporate citizens and
very community- oriented; ACI has taken over San Leandro's service
rather seamlessly; Waste Management does an outstanding job running
the Davis Street Transfer Station; San Leandro has been working
with ACI on the food waste issue and is looking forward to said
service; encouraged Council to consider both companies.
Rodolfo Lopez, Alameda, stated that he works for Norcal Waste
Systems; Norcal is a good company; awarding the contract to Norcal
would be wonderful.
Robert DeMartini, Norcal Waste Systems, stated that his team of
employees visited Alameda to review garbage issues and the current
state of recycling; Norcal believes in educating customers; Norcal
employees actively seek out customers and customize programs;
recycling should be maximized; customers should be persuaded not to
use garbage containers; food waste containers cannot simply be
placed at the curb; Norcal continually goes back after customers,
tailoring services and educating; Norcal will bring a commitment to
recycling to Alameda.
Debby Dunn, Norcal Waste Systems, stated Norcal is nationally -
recognized for its organics program and outreach materials, which
outline everything that can go in the organics bin; that she has
had the opportunity to watch both residential and commercial
customers significantly increase their recycling; programs and
training allow customers to recycle an amazing 50% to 900 of the
materials they generate; the residents and businesses in Alameda
would greatly benefit from Norcal's innovative programs and
excellent customer service.
David Edwards, Alameda, stated that he has been fairly happy with
Waste Management's collection techniques, methods and services;
drivers are friendly and wave and talk to customers.
Vince Petrie, Alameda, stated Alameda should recycle as much waste
as possible; that he supports the proposal from Norcal Waste System
because it has the highest amount of diversion; that he is willing
to pay more; Norcal workers are hard working and friendly due to
the employee -owned structure; Norcal offers the type of service
needed in Alameda.
David Luo, Alameda, stated that he works for Norcal Waste Systems;
Norcal's hazardous waste facility is one of the best of its kind
and accepts used motor oil, paints, batteries and other household
chemicals; over 800 of the material residents bring is recycled;
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 14
April 16, 2002
Norcal offers good union jobs, fair wages and good medical
benefits; the company is 100% employee- owned; Norcal does a good
job for the City of San Francisco and can do an even better job for
Alameda.
Patricia Reilly, Alameda, stated that about 10 years ago, she was
awakened by a garbage truck at about 6:30 a.m.; she called to
complain and a supervisor returned her call a half hour later; the
supervisor assured her that the early pickup would never happen
again and stated if there were ever any more problems, she should
call him personally; she has never heard another garbage truck at
6:30 a.m.; her 83- year -old always chats with the drivers and they
are terrific to her; drivers are gracious about taking something
extra away; her mothers gives drivers advice on how to do their job
and they listen politely; Waste Management gives reliable,
cheerful, good service.
Frank Sandoval, Alameda, stated that he owns a restaurant in San
Francisco and deals with Sunset Scavenger Company, which is a part
of Norcal; by using commercial food waste recycling, he has reduced
his garbage bill by 70%; Norcal's service is really good; urged
Norcal be selected as Alameda's provider.
John McCabe, Solid Waste Franchise Team (SWFT) Member, thanked
staff for all the opportunities for SWFT members and the community
to participate in the process, make decisions and have input;
stated that he supports the staff recommendation; elected officials
should be fiscally responsible and ensure that the City has money
to provide services; there is an opportunity to reduce the cost to
the City; that he would prefer to have better services, rather than
receive the suggested rebate of $4.50 on garbage and recyclables
bills.
Louie Pellegrini, Alameda County Industries (ACI), thanked the City
for the process that was completed; stated it has been one of the
most fair and straightforward processes; ACI is pleased with the
staff recommendation; companies had every opportunity to respond to
issues on proposals; ACI is proud to be part of the City of
Alameda's achievement in increasing recycling through Alameda
Recycling in the last five years; ACI knows about going through a
transition and bringing in new services; ACI proved itself in the
City of San Leandro, when the City's garbage collection was
privatized; ACI is in the process of implementing a food waste
collection system in San Leandro, which will probably be on line
prior to startup in Alameda; ACI has good labor relations with
Local 70 and its employees; ACI's proposal has more routes and
drivers than other proposals; ACI's overall staffing is larger than
other proposals; food waste is cutting -edge technology; food waste
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 15
April 16, 2002
has been collected for years in garbage cans; now, ACI will
motivate residents and customers to put food waste in different
cans; ACI's food waste processing is at the State level for
permitting; that he is confident ACI will be able to perform food
waste collection and processing.
Bill Dobert, ACI, stated ACI is honored and proud to be recommended
by staff; staff took months to review proposals; the process was
delayed for three months to resolve additional questions; companies
had to provide 11 different service options; ACI's customer service
ranked highest; staff believes ACI can handle food waste processing
and collection; ACI's proposal includes an Alameda Recycling
Coalition to reach people, businesses, the community and schools;
the program includes working with Alameda Power and Telecom and
putting composting bins in all elementary schools; the compost will
be used to plant rose gardens throughout the City, parks and senior
centers; a Waste -Not program will also be created; a supervisor in
an electric cart will knock on residents doors to find out whether
or not there is recycling in their garbage container and will
provide a $100 gift certificate for downtown merchants; to be
involved, merchants simply have to be part of the business
recycling program; ACI has discussed the matter with the business
associations, which are very excited about the program; ACI will
hire people to be trainers for the kids at the Boys and Girls Club;
an environmental curriculum will be developed for teacher training
programs; high school students will be brought to ACI for job
shadowing and career opportunity programs; ACI will offer
internships; commended staff for its work.
Sebastian Baldassarree, Alameda, commended the City Manager and
staff for doing a great job involving the citizens of Alameda with
the recommendation; stated ACI, better known as Alameda Recycling,
has done a tremendous job during the past five years; Alameda
Recycling is a part of the community and has been involved with
partnering with Alameda Power and Telecom on the Earth Day event
last year, as well as supporting Alameda Meals on Wheels, the
Mastick Senior Center, the Chamber of Commerce, businesses, and the
Alameda Civic Light Opera; urged Council to approve the staff
recommendation.
Mayor Appezzato thanked everyone for being courteous; noted the
process was extended to address concerns; the decision will be
difficult.
Councilmember Daysog thanked staff for the community input process
and for grading providers; stated 22 areas were reviewed; adding by
percentage, the total rating for ACI was 2.894 and Waste Management
had 2.706; Norcal was rated highest in 9 categories, while Waste
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 16
April 16, 2002
Management was highest in 8 and ACI in 7 categories; that he
believes Waste Management should have received a higher score for
education because it has a facility for children to learn about
environmental and solid waste disposal issues; said scoring would
change the results to give Waste Management the highest overall
rating; the City is trying to garner savings, which can be used for
City services, such as sidewalks and street repair; the savings
would be greater with Waste Management, which submitted a proposal
costing $8 Million, versus $8.2 Million for the next closest [ACI];
Norcal made a great case for diversion; the matter should be
delayed for two weeks to address the savings [rebate]; thanked the
Mayor for making the [rebate] suggestion; stated City staff's idea
to use savings was a great idea.
Councilmember Kerr stated the overall cost for ACI's combined
services is $8.2 Million and Waste Management's cost is $8 Million;
on franchise tonnage diversion, ACI would divert 37% and Waste
Management would divert 450; on recyclables, ACI would divert
11,800 tons and Waste Management would divert 12,500 tons; for
organic material ACI would divert 7,100 tons and Waste Management
would divert 11,600 tons; Waste Management proposed to use one
combined truck for recyclables, rather than two trucks, which would
save wear and tear on streets; recyclables in her neighborhood are
picked up very early; that the criteria she values are: 1)
diversion and Waste Management has larger diversion; 2) cost, and
Waste Management's proposal is the lowest; and 3) use of two
trucks, rather than three; regarding the Mayor's proposal to rebate
the mitigation fee, the City has extra wear and tear on streets
from trucks; money should be retained because everyone has been
concerned about street conditions; savings should be shared with
residents; however, the City should retain enough to repair
streets; that she does not support hiring an additional Program
Specialist and increasing the City's expense to $900,000 per year;
the City should be able to supervise the Contract on $770,000 per
year.
Councilmember Johnson requested staff to describe the truck that
will be used by Waste Management.
The Deputy Public Works Director stated Waste Management would use
a split truck and would combine refuse and green waste; staff was
concerned about contamination issues; there are seasons
fluctuations with volumes of green waste and recyclables;
contamination occurs when the trucks run out of room or are not
balanced properly.
Councilmember Kerr stated if one side fills up, Waste Management
returns to the transfer station rather than continuing collection.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 17
April 16, 2002
The Deputy Public Works Director responded that staff's polling of
other cities indicates that contamination issues still persist.
Councilmember Johnson stated food waste recycling is important to
reduce solid waste; inquired whether staff is confident all
companies can handle said issue.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded in the affirmative.
In response to Councilmember Johnson's inquiry whether staff had
concerns regarding ACI's ability to handle food waste, the Deputy
Public Works Director responded there were no concerns regarding
experience; the permit at the Grover Facility must be amended,
however, regulators indicated that there should not be any problem
with adding food waste to the permit.
Councilmember Johnson stated that she is impressed with Norcal's
food waste recycling; cost is important; people have indicated that
there is no need for change; combining the services provides a
significant cost savings; the Mayor's suggestion to rebate the
mitigation fee to residents is good; residents have voted for tax
measures; the City should try to save money for residents.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that he supports the staff recommendation;
combining services provides the largest financial return; quality
of service is important; that he knows the quality of service
provided by ACI and Waste Management; inquired why the City needs
to hire additional staff.
The Deputy Public Works Director responded an additional Program
Specialist and part -time intern are being requested to oversee
public outreach required for new diversions programs, primarily
food waste; the City anticipates many questions and requests for
customization when food waste is implemented; there is a new
mandated commercial program; in addition, the Contract will be
based upon performance measures; the company's profit will be based
upon an unbiased City survey of customers, which City staff will
oversee; staff will also be responsible for calculating diversion
rates; outlined current program costs.
Mayor Appezzato inquired how many staff members oversee the program
currently, to which the Deputy Public Works Director responded 3.05
full time employees.
Vice Mayor DeWitt stated that he supports the Mayor's [rebate]
suggestion, however, he would like the matter reviewed further;
money should go back to the people; there should be further review
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 18
April 16, 2002
of the percentage which will be needed to provide critical
services.
Mayor Appezzato stated residential homeowners and multi - family unit
owners would receive the savings, while commercial users would not
receive a rebate.
Councilmember Johnson requested staff to describe the pilot program
for residential food waste.
The Deputy Public Works Director stated there would be extensive
education Citywide; for three months, a route would be selected to
work out the kinks and identify how to customize the program; after
the three -month period, the program would be introduced to the rest
of the City; Castro Valley just completed a similar program, which
was also used by San Francisco.
(02 -168A) Vice Mayor DeWitt moved approval of the staff
recommendation to award the Solid Waste disposal contract to Waste
Management of Alameda County and authorize the City Manager to
negotiate and execute the agreement.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(02 -168B) Vice Mayor DeWitt moved approval of the staff
recommendation to award Combined Collection Services Contract to
Alameda County Industries and authorize the City Manager to
negotiate and execute the agreement.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion, which carried by the
following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilmembers DeWitt, Johnson and
Mayor Appezzato - 3. Noes: Councilmembers Daysog and Kerr - 2.
(02 -168C) Vice Mayor DeWitt moved approval of the staff
recommendation to authorize an additional Program Specialist I /II
and 0.5 intern to oversee the recycling and performance based
requirements of the programs.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the
following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson
and Mayor Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1.
(02 -168D) Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff
recommendation to authorize establishment of a public service
mitigation fee, with the Mayor's suggestion [regarding rebate].
Mayor Appezzato stated that his suggestion was to rebate
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 19
April 16, 2002
residential customers and maintain [existing] rates for commercial
customers.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether the entire savings would be
rebated, to which Mayor Appezzato responded the rebate would be
pro -rated per parcel.
Councilmember Kerr inquired whether funding would be retained for
street repair due to the wear and tear on streets.
Mayor Appezzato responded in the affirmative; stated the commercial
portion would be retained for street repairs; the rebate would go
to residential customers only.
Vice Mayor DeWitt seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous
voice vote - 5.
Mayor Appezzato called a recess at 11:03 p.m., and reconvened the
Regular Meeting at 11:06 p.m.
(02 -169) Ordinance No. 2880, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
by Amending Subsection 8 -8.4 (Official Vehicles Designated Areas)
of Section 8 -8 (General Parking Regulations) of Chapter VIII
(Traffic and Motor Vehicles), Relating to Parking Spaces on Central
Avenue at the Historic Alameda High School." Finally passed.
Councilmember Kerr moved final passage of the Ordinance.
Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous voice vote - 5.
(02 -170) Ordinance No. 2881, "Amending the Alameda Municipal Code
by Amending Chapter II (Administration), Chapter VIII (Traffic and
Motor Vehicles) , Chapter XI (Bicycles) , Chapter XII (Designated
Parking), and Chapter XXII (Streets and Sidewalks), Eliminating the
Transportation Advisory Committee and Creating a Transportation
Commission and Technical Transportation Team." Finally passed.
Vice Mayor Dewitt moved final passage of the Ordinance.
Vice Mayor DeWitt inquired whether staff incorporated changes
regarding the appeal right based upon discussion at the last
Council meeting [April 2, 2002].
The City Manager responded staff incorporated changes.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 2 0
April 16, 2002
The City Attorney stated Subsection 2- 8.5(c) was added and read the
language.
Councilmember Johnson seconded the motion.
John Spangler, Alameda, thanked Council for supporting the
Transportation Commission; requested staff to provide information
on the selection process and timeline.
Mayor Appezzato requested staff to provide said information to Mr.
Spangler.
Michael Krueger, Alameda Transit Advocates, thanked Council and
staff for forming the Commission; stated the Commission will pick
up where the Public Transit Committee (PTC) left off.
Councilmember Johnson noted the (PTC) recommended the appeal
process.
Councilmember Kerr stated two committees will be funded at
approximately $1/4 Million each for a total of $1/2 Million; an
eleven member Commission seems somewhat unwieldy; the cost is too
high.
Councilmember Johnson stated Vice Mayor DeWitt and she served on
the PTC and support the PTC's recommendation; Councilmembers hear
many concerns about traffic and transportation; the City cannot
continue without addressing the matter in a thorough manner, which
can only be accomplished by having a Transportation Commission; the
City received benefit from having the PTC; there are regional
agencies which the City needs to continue working with to ensure
Alameda receives appropriate service levels; the City needs to
conduct its own transportation planning.
Mayor Appezzato stated transportation is the one issue that comes
up with every issue; everyone wants to stop projects due to
traffic.
The City Manager noted that there would be $258,000 in new costs;
of the $247,000 remaining costs, all but loo to 15% would have to
be spent and was already being spent to support the Transportation
Advisory Committee.
On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following
voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson and Mayor
Appezzato - 4. Noes: Councilmember Kerr - 1.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 21
April 16, 2002
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA
(02 -171) Sandra Williams, Alameda, discussed racism within the
Alameda Police Department and in the City of Alameda.
(02 -172) John Spangler, Alameda, stated that gains made by the
Public Transit Committee might be erased quickly by AC Transit
redistricting; service might be lost in Alameda before the
Transportation Commission gets started.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(02 -173) Councilmember Johnson stated that she has heard concerns
about hot rodders on Beach Road and provided information to staff.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Appezzato adjourned the
Regular Meeting at 11:20 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown
Act.
Regular Meeting
Alameda City Council 22
April 16, 2002