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 23 <br /> <br />ATTACHMENT 1 <br /> <br />SBWMA decision makers with regard to material sales revenue. We do request that these floor <br />prices are kept confidential. <br /> <br />As our floor prices are currently higher than the formula or market, we would be selling at our <br />floor price today when markets are down. The table in Exhibit 2 of the appendix to this letter <br />shows our floor price revenue, compared with SBR's floor price revenue (same tons as in prior <br />. table). We note that for SBR, we used their floor prices for half the volume (since that is their <br />'guarantee), and their formula for the remainder of the volume. This results in $78A42 higher <br />revenues per month with the HBC floors, which annualizes to $941,302 in higher sales. <br />Assuming that we are over any guarantee levels, this would result in approximately $706,000 in <br />incremental revenue to SBWMA. <br /> <br />We have consistently expJained to you that we felt that the Authority's analysis was lacking ;n, <br />understandi'ng our ability to market material, and these figures demonstrate that either using our <br />floor prices, or using our representative formulas, HBC will g,enerate higher revenues for <br />SBMWA. I <br /> <br />Finally, we appreciate the kind words in. the Staff report with regard to the "well thought out and <br />innovative approachlt to HBC and WSG's transfer station diversion program. The original <br />evaluation report said that WSG, offered an "excellent transfer station operation plan to <br />maximize diversion and improve operational efficiencies". We believe that this transfer station <br />incentive program will conservatively return up to $200,000 or more in incremental'reven.ue to ' <br />the Authority. An example of this calculation is included in Exhibit 3 in the appendix to this <br />letter. . <br /> <br />Adding these up, it appears that there is in fact a cost advantage for HBC over SBR. We find it <br />unfortunate that the reports issued by the Authority reflect the opposite conclusion. <br /> <br />We trust that the SBWMA anc;i its member cities will accept the above facts in the constructive <br />spirit in which they are being offered. We want to make sure that elected and appointed <br />representatives of the SBWMA member cities and County ultimately make a fair and informed <br />decision for their ratepayers. We continue to look forward to work with you for the very best <br />operation of the Shoreway facility. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Scott Tenney <br />President <br />Hudson Baylor Corporation <br /> <br />19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.