Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1993 0317 CC REG ITEM 11B'ORPARK, CALIFORNIA :y Council Meeting X99-3 ACTION: By ITEM , MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 AGENDA REPORT CITY OF MOORPARK CA! 1FORr':A r' Council Mooing i TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Mary K. Lindley, Assistant to the City Manager\�tl DATE: February 24, 1993 SUBJECT: Consider Memorandum of Understanding for Solid Waste Flow Commitment for the Development of a Materials Recovery Facility Pursuant to action taken at the Ventura County Waste Commission meeting on February 18, the Commission is requesting Council's consideration of the attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which, if approved, would express the City's intent to commit its solid waste flow to a Material Recovery Facility project currently under evaluation. Staff is recommending that Council review discuss the MOU but decline the City's participation at this time. Background The origin for the MOU grew out of the recent study by the Waste Commission on feasibility of material recovery facilities (MRF) in Ventura County. A MRF is a facility that sorts loads of solid waste (dirty MRF) and /or recyclable materials (clean MRF), picking out the materials which can be marketed or composted. Such a facility will be necessary in order for jurisdictions to meet the waste reduction goals under AB 939 of 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The Waste Commission hired CalRecovery to study the feasibility of a MRF(s) in Ventura County and provide recommendations as to the type of facility, facility capacity, number of facilities, location, costs estimates, and vendor selection. CalRecovery 7-1 PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. SCOTT MONTGOMERY PATRICK HUNTER BERNARDO M. PEREZ JOHN E. WOZNIAK Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Counalmember Counalmember Counalmember P~ on Reayded Pgoei Memorandum of Understanding February 24, 1993 Page 2 developed an RFP for a MRF project which contained several bid alternatives: 1) a regional MRF located in the west county ( assumes east county participation) ; 2 ) two subregional MRF, one in the west county and one in the east county; and 3) a subregional MRF in the west county (assumes no participation from the east county). The Waste Commission received three MRF proposal: Goal Coast for a regional facility in Camarillo; BLT for a regional facility in Oxnard; and FSCE for a regional facility in Saticoy and a subregional facility in Simi Valley. In a separate process, the City of Oxnard is negotiating with BLT on a MRF to be located in Oxnard with public ownership. The differences between the Waste Commission's and BLT's proposals are not unknow at this time. CalRecovery's final conclusion at the completion of its study and evaluation of the MRF proposals was that a regional MRF in Camarillo or Oxnard would be most cost effective for all jurisdictions with the exception of Simi Valley, due to haul costs. They also concluded that the design of the MRF should include sorting of recyclable materials (clean MRF) and composting capabilities. CalRecovery recommended that the Waste Commission begin negotiations with Gold Coast on the Camarillo site and hold BTL in the wings if negotiation prove not to be satisfactory. The Waste Commission instructed the City Managers Committee to review CalRecovery's findings and recommendations and make its own recommendation to the Commission. The City Mangers Committee found that economies of scale matter greatly and therefore a regional MRF is the most cost effective option. They felt that the west county jurisdiction have no time to spare, they must take action immediately. In all likelihood, transfer capability will be needed by late 1993. This is not the case for the east county. With regards to the east county cities, the committee felt that further analysis is required. The east county cities do not face the same disposal crisis as the west county and have a different set of priorities. It was noted by the Committee that the east county cities may wish to take "wait and see" approach. The study conducted by CalRecovery shows that while a regional MRF is preferable, a decision on the part of the east county cities not to participate doesn't negitively impact a west county facility enough to derail the process. The City Managers Committee recommended that each jurisdiction be ask to sign an MOU to commit solid waste flow control to the MRF project. Such a commitment would allow the jurisdictions to maximize negotiating leverage. It is this MOU that Council is begin asked to consider. Memorandum of Understanding February 24, 1993 Page 3 The main focus of the study conducted by CalRecovery, and the follow -up analysis done by the City Managers Committee, was the disposal crisis and feasibility of a MRF in the west county. Because Moorpark and the other east county cities have easy access to the Simi Valley Landfill and to landfill and MRFs in west Los Angeles County, we have time to conduct further analysis and explore other options. It is possible that a simpler MRF in the east county would be more cost effective for Moorpark residents. Staff proposes that the City decline to participate in the MOU at this time, but indicate its interest in continuing to work with the Waste Commission and the other jurisdictions to bring about regional solutions to the solid waste disposal and compliance with AB 939. Recommendation Staff recommends that Council decline the City's participation in the MOU for solid waste flow commitment for the development of a Material Recovery Facility and respond with Council's action in writing to the Waste Commission. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR SOLID WASTE FLOW COMMITMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is made this day of , 1993, and is entered into by and between the County of Ventura and the Cities of Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Simi Valley, San Buenaventura and Thousand Oaks (referred to collectively herein as "parties "). RECITALS WHEREAS, each of the parties to this Agreement is a "public agency" as this term is defined in Section 6500 of the Government Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, each of the parties hereto has the power in addition to other powers which are common to each of them, to contract for siting, development, construction and operation of a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) for the processing of refuse and recyclables generated within each of the parties' territorial boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Cities and County have a multitude of responsibilities under AB 939 to meet certain diversion goals by 1995 and 2000; and WHEREAS, the parties find that it would be to their mutual advantage and benefit to work together and share costs to evaluate MRF options, negotiate a facility contract and develop a joint powers management authority to oversee project development and operation. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows and enter into this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, ( "MOU" herein): ARTICLE I PURPOSE AND ACTIVITIES The purpose of this MOU is to provide for coordinated development of a regional MRF Facility, evaluation of proposals, and recommendation for siting, design, construction, financing, and operation of such facility and for specific contract terms and vendors. The parties intend to develop a MRF Facility that will ultimately meet the solid waste management needs of participating local general purpose governments. The parties agree that the purpose of this MOU is to develop feasible MRF project options and to serve as basis for developing a formal joint power authority for development and management of a MRF project. Each of the parties hereby declares its intent to commit solid waste flow generated within its territorial boundaries to a facility pursuant to the purpose and activities described herein. Each party reserves the right to make final Memorandum of Understanding determinations regarding the commitment of solid waste flow generated within its boundaries, prior to issuance of a contract for MRF development. Specific activities to be undertaken pursuant to this MOU shall include, without limitation: 1. Develop a budget and allocation of work among the parties for implementation of this MOU. 2. Development and analysis of MRF project options. 3. Negotiate terms and conditions for project development to insure achievement of transfer diversion requirements to the best mutual advantage of participating local governments. 4. Develop contract terms for MRF development and operation ARTICLE 2 MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE A Management Committee consisting of the Chief Executive of each of the parties to the MOU shall be formed to advise the parties as needed on matters relating to the MOU. Each member of the Management Committee may designate another staff person as his /her designee. The General Manager of the Ventura Regional Sanitation District and the Director of the County Solid Waste Management Department shall serve as ex- officio members of the Management Committee. The Management Committee shall meet on a regular basis to accomplish the objectives and tasks covered by this MOU. ARTICLE 3 FUNDING Each party to this MOU recognizes its independent responsibilities and local fee authorities pertaining to Solid Waste Management. Each party shall bear the full expense of the staff support it provides and provision by it of other resources for implementation of this MOU. Coordination of this work under this MOU shall be the responsibility of each party and each party shall absorb its own costs related thereto. It is anticipated that expenditures related to MRF development efforts will be reimbursed to participating jurisdictions once a facility is operational and a suitable fee structure is approved. ARTICLE 4 TERM, TERMINATION, AMENDMENTS This MOU shall be effective on the date of execution hereof by the parties named above, and shall automatically terminate upon funding of a joint powers authority as specified herein, unless the parties, by a majority vote, page 2 Memorandum of Understanding agree to terminate this MOU earlier. In the event this MOU is terminated, remaining funds shall be returned to the parties that provided those funds on a prorata basis. ARTICLE 5 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND LIABILITY Each party to this MOU recognizes its independent responsibility and potential liability for solid waste management issues pertaining to its jurisdiction. The parties agree that this MOU in no way restricts or limits that responsibility, liability, or statutory authority and further, that this MOU in no way constitutes any form of indemnification by any party or any other party hereto with respect to such responsibilities, liabilities, and statutory authorities or in any other respect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have first executed this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING by authorized officials thereof on the date indicated above. Charlotte Craven, Mayor City of Camarillo, California ATTEST: City Clerk Paul W. Lawrason, Jr., mayor City of Moorpark, California ATTEST: City Clerk page 3 Michael McMahan, Mayor City of Fillmore, California ATTEST: City Clerk Robert N. McKinney, Mayor City of Ojai, California ATTEST: City Clerk Memorandum of Understanding Dr. Manual M. Lopez, Mayor City of Oxnard, California ATTEST: City Clerk Margaret A. Ely, Mayor City of Santa Paula, California ATTEST: City Clerk Orvene Carpenter, Mayor City of Port Hueneme, California ATTEST: City Clerk Greg Stratton, Mayor City of Simi Valley, California ATTEST: City Clerk Greg Carson, Mayor Judy Lazar, Mayor City of San Buenaventura, California City of Thousand Oaks, California ATTEST: City Clerk page 4 ATTEST: City Clerk