My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2009-08-24 clsd and reg
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2009
>
AgdaPkt 2009-08-24 clsd and reg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2009 11:58:43 AM
Creation date
8/20/2009 2:22:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
8/24/2009
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
325
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />7A <br />Page 16 <br /> <br />ATTACHMENT 1 <br /> <br />Commodities Guarantee <br /> <br />Commodity sales, along with tipping fees, are SBWMA's main sources of revenue. Tipping fees <br />are the charges levied upon a ton of waste, which is delivered to various landfills, depending on <br />the waste category. The guarantees, offered by proposers that they will deliver a set. commodity <br />amount, is as crucial as operating costs to the SBWMA. Commoditi.es are recyclables. They <br />.consist of aluminum cans that can be turned into the state for CR V funds, glass sold to bottlers, <br />paper and cardboard sold to overseas mills. Commodity prices have been historically high in the <br />last few years, but market prices fell dramatically in October 2008, making commodity <br />guarantees questionable. <br /> <br />SBWMA 's Due Diligence Process <br /> <br />The Grand Jury learned that SBR planned to run the Shoreway Facility as a "satellite" operation <br />from its headquarters in Los Angeles. At what point the SBWMA discov~redth.is fact is not <br />clear to the Grand Jury. SBR expects to receive additional funds annually from SBWMA <br />because of its '~mjsca1culations and omissions." The Grand Jury has learned, subsequent to <br />SBR's selection as Shoreway Operations Contractor, that it renegotiated, on May 19,2009, to <br />decrease its recyclin.g revenue guarantee to $6.75 million. However, SBWMA is still in <br />deliberations with SBR and has not established a final amount to operate the Shoreway Facility. <br /> <br />On March 29, 2009, HBC wrote a letter to the SBWMA contesting its basis for the selection of <br />SBR. (see Attachment 1) <br /> <br />Additionally, the Grand Jury learned from different sources that there is concern about ongoing' <br />problems with Community Recycling, one of the two SBR partners. The Local Enforcement <br />Agency for Los Angeles has issued forty-two outstanding Notices of Violations to Community <br />Recycling Sun VaHey Recycling and Transfer operations. Twenty-six of the violations concern <br />pennitting. Community RecyCling is operating without the correct pennit. The other sixteen <br />violations are for vector~ bird and animal control; training; hazardous, liquid, or special waste . <br />containment; scavenging; traffic control; cleaning; reporting; and load checking. In addition, on <br />February 26, 2009, during a SBWMA Board meeting, a member of the Teamsters Union <br />distributed a letter from Teamster's Local 396 of South em California. The letter stated the union <br />had Umajor labor problems" and "horrible working conditions'; with Community Recycling. <br />SBR claims it has good union relationships. <br /> <br />SBWMA 's Management Conduct <br /> <br />Allied was one of the proposers that submitted for the contract to haul garbage and run the <br />Shoreway Facility. The decision to recommend either HBC or SBR to operate the Shoreway <br />Facility in August 2008 meant that Allied's bid to operate the Shoreway Facility was rejected. <br />Shortly after its bid was rejected, Allied submitted an alternative proposal to the SBVlMA that <br />addressed the ever-increasing cost proposed by the SBWMA to build the new Shoreway Facility. <br />The request to consider this alternate proposal for building the MRF was denied by the SBWMA, <br />due to what-the SBWMA had described as "non-compliance with th~ RFP requirements." The <br />denial prompted Allied to contact the press and city council members for a hearing. <br /> <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.