HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/26/2013 - Study SessionCity Council Minutes
City Council Study Session
February 26, 2013 -- 4:00 p.m.
I. ROLL CALL - 4:10 p.m.
Present: Council Member Gardner, Council Member Petros, Mayor Pro Tem Hill, Mayor Curry,
Council Member Selich, Council Member Henn, Council Member Daigle
II. CURRENT BUSINESS
I. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
In response to Council Member Daigle's questions regarding Item 5 (Engineering Design and
Construction Support Services Associated with Replacement of the Big Canyon Reservoir
Floating Cover), Public Works Director Webb reported that MWH will design the cover and be
in charge of construction management. He added that the contract also includes a warranty.
In response to Council Member Henn's questions, Public Works Director Webb reported that
the costs associated with Item 4 (Santa Ana Heights Pavement Restoration) relate to the
properties located on the north side of Mesa Drive where there are grade differentials, fences,
and structures within the public right -of -way: Regarding Item 7 (Material 'Testing and
Inspection Services for Newport Beach Civic Center and Park Project), Assistant City
Manager Badum reported that the do -over costs will be charged back to the subcontractor. In
addition, he stated that work has been added to the project and there is an additional amount
relative to the expanded scope.
2. ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (OCSD) - FUTURE PROJECT
OVERVIEW. [100 - ::013]
Mayor Curry indicated that he is the City's representative on the Orange County Sanitation
District (OCSD) Board and reported that the City completed $40 million of improvements
through OCSD and another $100 million of projects will be discussed today.
Nick Kanetis, OCSD Director of Engineering, utilized a PowerPoint presentation to discuss
the OCSD's Newport Beach Construction Program. He addressed OCSD's mission, service
area, governance, customer base, infrastructure, treatment plants, increasing levels of
service, investments in infrastructure, and transition to rehabilitation and replacement. He
discussed the six projects in Newport Beach which represent an investment of approximately
$100 million and consists primarily of rehabilitation and replacement of deteriorated sewer
pipelines. He addressed construction techniques, reported that the work will occur in street
rights -of -ways, and addressed construction impacts to traffic patterns. Mr. Kanetis stated
that a community outreach program will be implemented in order to gain community
understanding and acceptance of the work, He presented examples of informational flyers
and the construction hotline information.
Volume 61 - Page 72
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
February 26, 2013
Mayor Curry commented on impacts and inconveniences that will occur due to the program,
but emphasized the importance of the program.
Council Member Henn noted that almost every main arterial on the west side of Newport
Beach will be impacted at some point.
In response to Council Member Selich's questions regarding the proposed rate schedule,
OCSD Assistant General Manager Jim Herberg reported that a rate increase of 4.8% is being
proposed for the first year, followed by a 2.4% increase per year for the following four years.
Nancy Skinner believed that whatever it costs to implement the program is worth every
penny.
Mayor Curry recessed the meeting at 4:25 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 4:45
p.m. with all Council Members in attendance.
3. RESIDENTIAL REFUSE COLLECTION REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP), 1100-
20131
Mayor Curry emphasized that there is no proposal at this time, but clarified that ideas and
options will be presented and Council will evaluate the options and provide direction to staff.
He reported that hard copies of the PowerPoint presentation are available for public review.
Municipal Operations Director Harmon reported that Council directed staff to develop a
Request for Proposal (RFP) that would manage solid waste operations. He reported that staff
has been working closely with HF &H to develop the initial study which will look at City
operations
Laith Ezzet, HF &H Senior Vice President, utilized a PowerPoint presentation to provide
information about HF &H and his qualifications and background, the City's contract with
CR &R to process residential waste, current service providers, and the amount of tonnage
collected. He reported that 41% of the residential waste collected by the City is recycled. He
addressed potential residential service options for the RFP, including a proposal for the
current system, a proposal with specific guidelines on any system which the proposers believe
will work in the City, and a proposal for three - stream collection with separate containers for
trash, recycling and green waste, He noted that the third proposal would entail a different
allocation of costs between recycling and trash compared to what currently exists. Mr. Ezzet
addressed examples of other RFP requirements and transfer station tonnage. He noted that
56% of the City's transfer station capacity is underutilized and indicated that transfer station
options include allowing the proposer to use it at no charge for delivering City waste,
accepting additional fee - paying waste to generate revenue for the City, or closing the transfer
station and using the facility for other City purposes. He added that the decision regarding
the transfer station needs to be made in order to obtain the RFPs.
Mayor Curry expressed concern about increasing fees. Council Member Gardner believed that
the issue of fees should be discussed prior to making a final decision. Mr. Ezzet noted that the
RFP will not have any predisposition regarding increased costs, but rather will request costs
related to each option.
In response to Council questions, Municipal Operations Director Harmon, reported that the
City's facility acts as a transfer facility and that the trash is then sent to CR &R to be sorted.
Mr. Ezzet added that the City's current service is considered a single - stream collection with
manual service, and the RFP would propose to charge the City on a monthly cost - per -home
Volume 61 - Page 73
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
February 26, 2013
basis. Regarding the transfer station, he reported that the value of the City's transfer station
could be quantified through the RFP process. Further, the issue of using the transfer station
in connection with a three - stream process will need to be assessed to determine if the transfer
station can handle a three - stream system versus the current one- stream system. Regarding
whether the City's facility would be busier with a tbree- stream system, Municipal Operations
Director Harmon reported that the current tonnage includes recycling and green waste. If the
City changes to a three- stream system, he indicated that there will probably not be an
increase in capacity. He further explained that it would still handle the same amount of
tonnage, but that it would be staged differently. Regarding the differences between trucks
that pick up trash and the ones that transfer trash, Municipal Operations Director Harmon
explained that the City's collection trucks hold five to ten tons, and transfer trucks hold about
21 tons. He noted that there is a benefit to using a transfer station instead of hauling waste
long distances. Regarding bin sizes, Municipal Operations Director Harmon affirmed that
individual residents would have a choice of bin size at no charge, and that this is the current
process for Newport Coast.
Mayor Pro Tern Hill believed that the City should maximize the revenue opportunities of the
transfer station and noted that, with a three - stream system, the time involved in moving the
same amount of tonnage would increase, therefore providing less available capacity.
Municipal Operations Director Harmon reported that the State considers truck trips, as well
as other factors; and explained that trucks can be routed in order to keep the transfer station
busy and handle the three hundred tons.
Mayor Curry questioned the financial implications of the three transfer station options.
Municipal Operations Director Harmon explained that there is currently no financial data
until proposals are received since the private haulers will assess the financial implications
during the RFP process.
Council Member Henn emphasized the need to determine the desired core service level in
order to generate the RFP, as well as having separate pricing items for the optional services
desired by the residents. He pointed out that the City uses non - exclusive franchises to handle
commercial waste hauling and noted that the City is one of the few cities that operate in this
manner. He requested alternatives for the City and its economic implications. Municipal
Operations Director Harmon confirmed that commercial contracts within the City are
currently non - exclusive, expire by March 2017, and do not have a cap; however, he reported
that staff is recommending going to a more exclusive commercial system. Council Member
Henn noted that, in an exclusive environment, it would be a competitive bid process and may
include revenue stream direct to the City from the haulers.
Dr. Don Udall spoke in opposition to any change at this time, believed that the three - stream
system would not work, and discussed comments received by him from former City Manager
Bob Wynn who had a negative experience with a system that was contracted out. He reported
that Assistant City Manager Badum spoke at his homeowners' association meeting and
mentioned the aging trucks, as well as the risk of injuries and State compensation issues are
factors for starting these discussions.
Tom Moulson discussed the limited space for newer trash trucks in some areas and spoke in
opposition to any change at this time. He addressed a survey which indicated that a majority
of the people were satisfied with the present system.
Dennis Baker agreed that the multi- stream system requires increased awareness; however,
expressed concern that, with the single- stream system, someone would need to sort through
his trash to pull out recyclable material. He expressed concern that there are three different
Volume 61 - Page 74
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
February 26, 2013
trash trucks that service a one block commercial area near his residence and asked how much
is recycled in commercial areas. He indicated that he would have no problem with changing
to a multi - stream system.
Jim Mosher expressed concern with an outside vendor providing basic public services at a
price that is lower than what government employees can provide. He expressed hope that,
when the proposals are returned, staff will look into why the City could not replicate what the
vendors are proposing.
Stephanie Barger believed that the City needs to develop a zero -waste plan in order to have a
positive impact on the environment. She stressed the importance of zero - waste, noted
benefits to businesses, and encouraged the City to study the issue carefully.
Ron Hendrickson referenced a letter from the Newport Hills Community Association Board
which expressed concerns with replacing the City's in -house collection system. He spoke in
opposition to a multi- stream system, and noted that sorting at home often fails and would
ultimately require that the refuse be resorted elsewhere at an additional cost to the City. He
suggested that an analysis be conducted regarding the areas in the City which can and cannot
accommodate the auto -arm trucks. He believed that a multi- stream system would result in a
reduction to the community's quality of life.
Nancy Skinner believed that sorting recyclables will not decrease her quality of life. She
expressed hope that the City Council will implement the use of recycling containers, but
agreed that recycling takes education. She encouraged Council to promote recycling.
Steve Prough expressed his appreciation to Council for considering this issue and spoke in
opposition to a multi- stream system. He expressed concerns with outsourcing the work and
noted the satisfaction rating of the current system. He discussed the need to know the exact
costs for the various options in order to determine whether the gain is worth the risk of losing
the present system.
Tom Callister spoke in support of the single- stream system currently being used in the City.
He expressed concern with lack of space for multiple containers and believed that it is a
quality of life issue.
David Fey spoke in support of keeping the current system, but agreed with going out to bid.
He stressed the need for providing the same level of service that the City currently provides
and expressed concern with the increase in trucks with a multi - stream system.
Mayor Curry believed that the presentation did nothing to alleviate some of the concerns of
the community. He noted that this is primarily a financial decision and that the only reason
for proceeding with the RFP would be to consider a potential cost savings. He stressed the
need to have financial data on the various options, noted the desire to focus on existing
services, and acknowledged community testimony, input, and desires. He indicated that the
City should duplicate the current service within the RFP, leave commercial operations the
same for now, and encourage all bidders to make an offer of employment to the current City
refuse staff. He emphasized that the issue began due to the need to replace existing trucks
and believed that the City needs to maximize the value of its transfer station. He indicated
that the City should not increase fees.
Council Member Gardner believed that this is not strictly a financial decision and agreed with
the need to be considerate to the residents. She pointed out the need for some type of
automated system due to injuries and believed that there are ways to implement it without
Volurae 61 - Page 75
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
February 26, 2013
losing the current the level of service. She noted that quality of life also includes the future
and believed that Council needs to consider the current process, but also consider making
changes to refine the process.
Council Member Henn noted that the direction today is for Council to give staff guidance so
they can return with facts so Council can make decisions. He stated that determinations need
to be made regarding the costs involved with outsourcing the same service that is being
provided today. He noted that quality of life deals with other issues besides cost and that
there are many factors to consider. He stated that Council has an obligation to ensure that all
the facts are understood and added that residents have an obligation to withhold judgment
until they have seen all the facts. He agreed with options one and three, including allowing
outsourcers to provide solutions based on the needs of the various areas. He suggested having
a second basis for proposal wherein a core set of standards is identified; the Peninsula uses
single and multiple containers, including having bulk pickup and Saturday service; and the
possibility of having a concierge service to assist special events and on- demand service. He
noted that there are tradeoffs related to any option considered and reiterated the need to
receive all of the facts. He added that outsourcers should be encouraged to offer employment
to City employees.
Mayor Pro Tem Hill commented on Council's responsibility to consider outsourcing if the City
can save money and provide the same or better levels of service and quality of life. He
indicated that he supports looking at pricing the City's existing system and believed that the
issue of replacing the current equipment needs to be considered separately. He questioned
the existence of a reserve for replacing the trucks. He agreed with the need to maximize the
transfer station and believed that information on any other approach would be helpful, but
stated that there is no single formula that would fit the City since the proposals would need to
be unique to the different City areas.
Council Member Petros stated that there is a resounding message from the community that
the level of service should not change. He believed that this should be the main consideration
and stressed the importance of comparing the differences between the current system and the
outsourced system.
Council Member Daigle noted the need for a comprehensive set of facts and stated that she is
not convinced that recycling at the front end would be beneficial to the City. She stated that
the community will have a chance to provide feedback during the process and asked that staff
provide options and related costs.
Council Member Henn clarified that he supports option one, as well as an amalgamation of
options two and three. He believed that allowing unlimited pickup would be an important
service level that would need to be replicated. He suggested requiring the contractors to
provide information regarding the single- stream and multi - stream process with related costs
and encouraged residents to determine what size containers they would need. Council
Member Henn requested to see the RFP before it is distributed.
Mayor Curry commented on the need to be thoughtful and clear as to what the RFP is
expected to produce.
Municipal Operations Director Harmon reiterated the options presented and believed that
option two will also encompass option three.
It was the consensus of Council to direct staff to return to the City Council with the
Volume 61 - Page 76
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session
February 26, 2013
final REP before it is distributed.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Regarding Item 10 (Uptown Newport Planned Community), Jim Mosher noted the complexity of the
project and believed that Council should allow more time for public review. Regarding the Closed
Session Agenda, he noted that there is a litigation item about the old reservoir cover. He noted that
the Airport Settlement Agreement is not on the agenda and believed that, if a subcommittee has
been designated to address the agreement, it should be noticed.
IV. ADJOURNMENT - 6:28 p.m.
The agenda for the Study Session was posted on February 22, 2013, at 7:20 a.m. on the
City Ball Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration
Building.
dAi 4K��
Recording Secretary
Mayor
am- ;6W---
City Clerk
Volume 61 - Page 77