2025.01.27 Speaker Card - PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

From:Sharon King To:GRP-City Council Cc:Mike King Subject:Re: Sewer Waste Rates Proposal: Jan. 27, 2025 Meeting Date:Saturday, January 25, 2025 11:13:06 AM You don't often get email from sharon_queen_2000@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important Mike King 1616 Vera Ave. Redwood City, CA 94061 Account #: 10026880 Recology # 0730790527 *** Statement of protest against the proposed change in rates scheduled to be discussed and voted upon at tonight's meeting (1/27/2025) Attention: City Council Members I'm (we) writing to convey that I'm against ANOTHER increase for the following reasons..... 1) Only 11 months ago (2/26/2024 you had the very same situation, meeting, decision) which increased the rates of $7.00 per cart per month. Redwood City in that notice (and the notice for tonight's meeting) you stated that you sought to be "in the middle or take the average in calcuating the proposed pricing." Yet, at least four other affluent cities within the County were then (2/26/2024) less than Redwood City and also now; (1/27/2025) they are Burlingame, San Carlos, San Mateo, Foster City. 2) This time the proposal is NOT doing or implementing a unilateral price increase, but rather by the size of the cart; some $8, $7, $6, $5; why? If a resident uses a 20 gallon cart (the smallest) they will be paying the $8 fee, doesn't seem to be fair....smaller carts could be property owners that are either seniors or even singles; where's the logic in the computation for the smaller cart paying more versus the larger cart paying less; residents deserve an explanation. 3) Redwood City residents unfortunately have been paying more fore various services, utilities, taxes; and I'm sure part of it is falling under the reason of the "Budget Challenges" (article written 6/5/2024: "Redwood City Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Recommended Budget" Advancing Resident Priorities Amidst Financial Challenges (written by Jennifer Yamaguma, Deputy City Manager) The article highlights a deficit and balancing services with financial realities. The forecasted deficit was approximately $9.3 million,(revised to $10.5 million over the next 5 years) with a $360 million shortfall for a program intended to fund public facilities and infrastructure. City Manager Melissa Stevenson Diaz has also said (6/5/2024) "We are a very lean organization which manages expenditures carefully" I strongly disagree with that statement because I see a lot of "waste" and un-needed projects occuring, versus a higher priority on needed items and "living within the means" concept. (balanced budget) Diaz went on to say "Without NEW revenues, the City will need to consider service reductions in the future years." (public safety, library and park services, youth and senior programs) Obviously the City has issues and problems to address when it's running in the RED ! Cutting out essential and attractive services in order to come out of a deficit, or raising prices on a less than an ANNUAL price increase; with unequal payment amounts; higher than it's neighboring county cities sounds like the City is DESPERATE for finding/creating money options. Your notice explains that the proposed increase is due to a contract with Recology San Mateo County. Perhaps, Redwood City should look into renegotiating the contract with Recology or pursue another service supplier for it's residents. If the City truly desires to create "Revenue" it needs to display 3 key elements: 1) Attract people to live here by providing services that are NOT expensive or a burden. 2) Transparency with the City Budget, living within the means attitude. 3) Provide more time for your discussions and decision making before