Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 01/05/1994PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE JANUARY 5, 1994 PRESENT: PAUL MANN JON JOHNSON DON WICKSTROM TOM BRUBAKER GARY GILL ABSENT: JIM BENNETT Rabanco - Garbage Contract Rates TONY McCARTHY MAY MILLER STEVE CAPUTO NELS JOHNSON MR & MRS RUST Steve Caputo stated that in July of 1993, Rabanco requested a garbage rate increase due to cost of service. He said this was followed up with an August 24th letter showing numbers and reasons for the increase. Caputo said he had a discussion both with Don Wickstrom and Roger Lubovich and asked where the City stood on this. At that time, Wickstrom informed him that this was a Council decision. Rabanco said at that time that they did not want to go to audit but would rather work something out. Caputo said Rabanco had requested a 21% increase and he felt an audit would delay it another 30 days. Caputo said they needed this in July and now it is 3 - 4 months later. He said they were very comfortable at that time with 15% however since then, they have talked more within their company and they would like 18%; Caputo said they are now comfortable to go with an audit however, the increase will be greater than 18% and we will save lost time. Caputo said he feels the process has been stalled and they would like to move on this. Mann asked why it would be more with an audit. Caputo said they asked for 21% and they feel the audit would support a 21% increase. Caputo said that 18% now is better than 21% four months from now. Caputo said they have comparative rates from sister cities in this area and from unincorporated King County. Caputo said that Kent's rates are well below everyone else. Wickstrom said that we looked at some data that Rabanco provided and there are two arguments in their proposed rate increase. He said one is related to their maintaining that the commercial accounts were subsidizing the residential rates and they can no longer do that since the territory has been divided. Wickstrom said the other argument was that because we have now gone to an incentive residential rate for garbage - the smaller the can the less the charge, more people have gone to a smaller can and have gone to recycling. He said that while they still have to provide 1 the same service, the numbers they have given us shows their revenues have actually decreased by 6% while their customer accounts have increased by 8°s. Wickstrom said there is some relationship there. As far as the argument about subsidizing residential; the rates we used in the contract were the WUTC established rates. Wickstrom surmised that he thought WUTC would look at each individual customer class on a stand alone basis. As such, since our rates were WUTC established, he did not quite follow the hauler's logic. Wickstrom said that in making a comparison with other cities as far as their rate vs. ours, with most other cities doing recycling it appears that our rates are a little lower for garbage service. Wickstrom said that we have no basis to say it should be 21% or whatever, and the only way we could really do that is to go to an audit. He said that under the contract, the hauler is required to pay for the audit. Nels Johnson of Rabanco, said they did an internal audit in August with their own CPA staff and at that point, all the numbers they ran thru came up with a 21% increase and Rabanco is confident that an auditor would find the same thing. Wickstrom said there would be a cost of living increase, or CPI increase, in April under the contract. He said that in April he would assume Rabanco would go for the cost of living increase. Nels Johnson said the CPI increase does not amount to much of anything. Referring to the garbage contract, Brubaker said there are basically four instances justifying a rate increase. He explained that one is an increase in dump fee costs not associated with a change in the consumer price index; another area is called "unusual cost" such as changes in the law; a third area is the CPI area and the fourth area is a rate adjustment to reflect justified increases and operating expenses and that particular request is limited to once per year. Brubaker stated that in Rabanco's first letter to us, they based their request for a rate increase on this increase and operating expense; in their last letter to us, they said it more properly reflected a different item which was the "unusual cost" item,* such as a change in the law. Brubaker said he has conferred with the City Attorney and his feeling about this issue of the commercial -residential subsidy is, that was part of the negotiating quid pro quo in the Contract when it was first entered into. In other words, Rabanco entered into the contract with knowledge that there were would be this averaging of the two Tri- Star and Rabanco rates on the commercial end and that it would have an impact. Brubaker said that since Rabanco knew this was going to happen when they willingly entered into the contract, he has trouble understanding how that could be a basis for an increase. Brubaker said that the recycling issue looks like a legitimate issue and he felt that in order to avoid Rabanco incurring the cost of doing an audit, perhaps they could provide us with more specific information for review. 2 Brubaker said that less than a year ago, we entered. into a lengthy contract to lock in service until the year 2001 and now Rabanco is asking for a 21% increase in rates within one year. Brubaker recommended that by the next committee meeting we come back with some sort of compromise, solution and/or a recommendation to go to an audit. Caputo stated that they have used every avenue that the contract has given them and as it gets more and more delayed they would expect to be able to retroactive an increase. Committee recommended that staff review the rate increase issue and bring it back to committee. Segregation Request - LID 320 Wickstrom stated that this was a James Street LID and the segregation request was made by Schneider Homes, on the north side of James Street, west of West Valley Highway. Wickstrom requested approval of the segregation. Committee unanimously recommended approval of the segregation request. Sale of Surplus Vehicles Wickstrom referred to the list of vehicles that were submitted for surplus. Jack Spencer stated that we have 18 pieces of equipment and they all have high mileage or are in need of major repair. McCarthy said that we are getting a new Senior Center van in the 194 budget. He asked if the vans in the list are no longer useable. Spencer said that these were the vans that the Senior Center did have and he would like to keep the better of the two as a back-up. Committee unanimously recommended declaring this equipment as surplus and authorize the sale thereof at the next state auction, with the exception of one van to be used as back-up. Signal at Reiten & Jason Wickstrom said we received six bids and one was received thru FAX which turned out to be the low bid. He said there is $1000 difference between the low bid and the second bid; however because of some improprieties in the FAX bid, the second bidder would possibly sue us. He said that legally awarding the bid to the low bidder is defensible however, a great deal of staff time would be involved in a suit for a $1000 differential. Wickstrom said that the Public Works Dept. is recommending that the six bids be rejected, and the project be re -bid. Committee unanimously recommended rejection of all bids. K 1 Q Mill Creek Canyon Erosion - Acceptance Wickstrom said this was a project Public Works Dept awarded because it was under the bid limits and we were under time constraints to get the erosion control in Mill Creek and we had only a short amount of time to work in the creek due to the fish existing there. Wickstrom said we awarded the contract; it has been completed and the original amount was $34,991.88. He said there were some overruns of the original estimated quantities for dirt and rock which brought the final contract up to $39,500. In response to Johnson, Wickstrom said the additional funds came from the Mill Creek project and there is no problem with the funding. Committee unanimously recommended project be accepted as complete. North 4th Ave Street Rebuild - Acceptance Wickstrom said this was a project that we awarded to Segale to essentially rebuild the south half of N. 4th from 228th to Barnier's property which is half way to 212th St. He said the final contract amount was substantially less than the original amount. Committee unanimously recommended project be accepted as complete. 1993 Asphalt Overlays - Acceptance Wickstrom said this was an asphalt overlay contract to finish off an LID near the Garrison Creek Reservoir where we had an LID for sewer. He said because of winter weather, we had to close out the LID and reserve money to do the street restoration work until the following season. He said also that on Alvord we had another sewer LID; and because of the late time of year, we went back the next year and did the overlay. Wickstrom said the final amount was less than the original contract. Committee unanimously recommended project be accepted as complete. Reiten Road Landslide Repair - Acceptance Wickstrom said this was a project at Reiten Rd & Maclyn Street where the hillside was slipping away. He said the total amount was $25,050.00 and since the project was under $35,000, the Public Works Dept awarded it. He said there is another one to do further down the hill but this one is complete. Committee unanimously recommended project be accepted as complete. Family Homes Short Plat Bill of Sale Committee unanimously recommended bill of sale be accepted and bonds released after the one year maintenance period. 4 M Stone Pine East Sewer Extension Committee unanimously recommended bill of sale be accepted and bonds released after the one year maintenance period. Robinson Sewer Extension Committee unanimously recommended bill of sale be accepted and bonds released after the one year maintenance period. Conservation Futures Grants Wickstrom stated that this is a contract where the City will get approximately $800,00 for three parcels, and one is $500,000 for the Lagoon acquisition. He said Parks has one near the newspaper office and one at the upper end of Mill Creek at 104th & 267th. He said the Parks Committee has already approved their two parcels and we wanted to make sure that when this agreement came before Council, that the $500,000 would be included which would eliminate coming back to Committee. Brubaker stated that he has reviewed the contract and recommended some changes in the Indemnification. Brubaker feels he will be successful in getting the County to look at it a little differently but right now the way the Indemnification is written, it is called a "sole negligence standard" where basically unless County is solely responsible for damages arising from this contract, we are to indemnify the County to pay for 100% of the damages. He said in other words, if there is a claim arising from this contract against both the County and the City, and a jury finds that the County is 90% responsible for the damages and we are only 10% responsible, we still pay 100%. Brubaker said only in those instances where the jury finds the County 100% responsible do they agree to pay for the damages. Brubaker said he is trying to get them to agree to a straight forward comparative negligent standard. Committee unanimously recommended authorization for the Mayor to sign the agreement, dependent on the City Attorney concurring with the County on the change in the indemnification language. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. A