Laserfiche WebLink
412 <br /> <br /> no incentive ~o recycle. He added that he opposed ~he $1.17 <br /> increase for a 90-gallon can and that his group could do a separate <br /> recycling for $0.45 a month per household. He inquired if the City <br /> is mandated to deal only with Pleasanton Garbage Service for <br /> recycling. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes commented that the City has never been exclusive <br /> ~ith regard to recycling as evidenced by the presence of recycling <br /> containers in various locations around the City. He added that <br /> residents are not prohibited from giving materials for recycling to <br /> non-profit groups. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that the City is exclusive in the sense <br /> that the City cannot contract two different companies to do the <br /> same thing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Moss stated that it would not be in the City's best <br /> interest to have an exclusive franchise that would prohibit any <br /> other free enterprise from coming in to Pleasanton and competing <br /> for a recycling program. He mentioned that while he supported the <br /> belt program, he questioned the fact that the residents would be <br /> paying for that belt for the next five years which would then <br /> belong to Pleasanton Garbage Service. He said that the life of the <br /> belt could be extended from five to ten years and inquired if the <br /> residents will have a cost reduction benefit after the belt is <br /> fully paid for. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes stated that life period, depreciation and <br /> replacement factors have to be considered for major capital <br /> expenditures. Any garbage rate changes will be taken into account <br /> within five years. <br /> <br /> Mr. 1{ercer added that other considerations would include the <br /> need for replacement as well as repair and maintenance. <br /> <br /> Mr. ~4oss handed the Councilmembers a program cost summary <br /> which showed an estimated revenue which would make the recycling <br /> program about $250,000 less expensive than what was presented in <br /> the Staff Report. He stated that this increased profit would <br /> reduce the rate increase for the taxpayers by a substantial <br /> percentage. <br /> <br /> Mr. i;lercer requested Mr. Bocian to comment on the summary. <br /> <br /> Mr. ~ocian replied that he could not make any specific <br /> comments on the figures since he was not familiar with them. He <br /> indicated, however, that the summary used the same percentage <br /> ~reakdowns and the same volume of materials that the City utilized. <br /> He stated that the Staff Report's figures are based on those of the <br /> City of 3rea, whose recycling program, which has been in place for <br /> <br /> i -7-90 <br /> - 20- <br /> <br /> <br />