Loading...
CC 2022-04-12_11a Supplemental 1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Jessica Matson, Legislative & Information Services Director/City Clerk SUBJECT: Supplemental Information Agenda Item 11.a. – Consider Request from South County Sanitary Service for Integrated Solid Waste Collection Rate Increase DATE: April 12, 2022 Attached is correspondence received before 4 p.m. for the above referenced item. cc: City Manager Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Administrative Services Director City Attorney City Clerk City Website (or public review binder) From:Jim Guthrie To:Caren Ray Russom; Jimmy Paulding; Keith Storton; Kristen Barneich; Lan George Cc:Jessica Matson Subject:Trash rate increases Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:39:42 PM Mayor and Council Members: I apologize for the lateness of this email I wasn’t planning on commenting on the Trash rate increases but the 30% increase promoted me to go a little deeper. Given the 186% increase in costs for deprecation, I think a more through and clearer explanation than the one included in the report is warranted. Although I had to read is several times, my interpatient of it is that we benefited in the past from what turned out to be an accelerated rate of deprecation ( the 7 year period was actually longer) and now we are seeing the difference between some part of the fleet already depreciated to zero and depreciation on new more expensive vehicles? My questions are , how many years did we have zero depreciation, how much more expensive are the new vehicles and what is the new amortization period? The note the goes on to state, “Combined with a possible change in amortization schedule as noted in the sidebar, planned replacements should result in stabilized costs in the future.”. So, is there a new amortization rate or not and by “stabilized “will they just go up by less than 186%, stay the same or come down because the amortization rate is too short in this calculation? I have similar concerns about the Greenwaste pass through costs, but at least there is a more through explanation. In addition, they are out of the control of the contractor and therefore not an allowable cost in their profit calculation. The other area that I think needs more explanation is the additional IWMA costs. The table in the staff report shows expense for residential customers going up by as much as 750% ($0.30 to $2.26). How much of this increase is due to the IWMA expense being spread over fewer customers vs the change from a fixed cost to a % of the total bill. If that is not possible how much did the total IWMA cost for Arroyo Grande go up with the reformation of the IWMA? Thanks Jim Guthrie