My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040296
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CCMIN040296
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:45 AM
Creation date
5/13/1999 10:10:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/2/1996
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Sherwood said no, but the pick up would probably be only once a month and would <br /> have to be prearranged. He indicated one of the issues that has been discussed was the rates for <br /> rent on the transfer station. It is owned by the M & M Land Company, which is owned by the <br /> same principals who own PGS; therefore PGS pays rent to M & M Land. The franchise <br /> agreement specifies the payments up to 1991 with no specific rate beyond that. PGS has had <br /> an appraiser determine the land value and the market rent. Staff has proposed an alternative, <br /> which is lease payments that would equal what it would cost the City to purchase that land and <br /> pay it off over the remaining years of the franchise agreement. Staff is also recommending that <br /> a more thorough investigation be made. Staff would then report back to Council whether it <br /> makes sense to purchase the transfer station land. <br /> <br /> Ms. Micheloff referred to a two-person family with a 32-gallon container. They don't <br /> fall it even halfway. Is it possible to address those users who generate even less than the <br /> minimum? Would it be possible to have an automated can that is picked up every other week? <br /> <br /> Mr. Sherwood indicated that was a possibility. There are proposed hearings on the <br /> variable container rate structures. Now the smallest size is 32 gallon cans. Some communities <br /> have super-recycler can of 20 gallons that can be picked up automatically. This may be what <br /> some customers need. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico indicated there are a number of hearings that need to be held to discuss the <br /> alternatives and numerous options available before substantial changes are initiated. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver referred to the various periods required for review, yet there is a proposed <br /> rate increase. Why can't we make those decisions before the rate increase? <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico indicated the changes regarding can size, green waste collection, and manual <br /> vs. automated collection need time to consider and to be sure they are revenue neutral. The rate <br /> increases currently proposed are because of changes at the transfer station. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver asked why authorize $750,000 for green waste containers when we don't <br /> know ultimately what kind of containers we will need. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico said we will have that answer before the expenditure is made. If we don't <br /> authorize the Measure D expenditure now, there may be further significant increases in rates. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr indicated this authorized up to $750,000 and makes certain the money is <br /> available when the decision is made. She did not feel there was any commitment. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian indicated it was necessary to get Council approval to use Measure D funds <br /> for purchase of the cans, so that when options are to be implemented, the funds will be assured. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti supported the expenditure for the green waste and supported a separate <br />-- container for green waste. <br /> <br /> 04/02/96 -12- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.