HomeMy WebLinkAbout18 - Conduct a Proposition 218 Public Hearing and Consider a Residential Recycling Fee Rate Increase - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed
March 23, 2021
Item No. 18
From: City Clerk"s Office
To: Mulvey. Jennifer; Rieff. Kim
Subject: FW: "Recycling Service Fee" Increase
Date: Monday, March 22, 2021 10:38:53 AM
From: Patrick Schlup <patobys@cox.net>
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 10:38:41 AM (UTC -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: "Recycling Service Fee" Increase
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Attention City Clerk,
This is in response to the request regarding the increase in recycling fees from $3 to $6.28. This should not be
approved because CR & R is not recycling anything due to the pandemic. They are taking all materials to the same
trash collection site, including recycling materials collected from recycle bins. There is no division of materials and
there will not be until the end of the pandemic. In fact, we should not be paying even the $3 until CR & R resumes
recycling: what has the $3 been used for if there is no recycling?
Thanks,
Patrick Schlup
16 Edgewood Dr, Newport Beach 92660
Received After Agenda Printed
March 23, 2021
Item No. 18
To: David Webb, Director of Public Works
Questions and Comments Related to the 2020 Recycling Fee Study
Date: 3/22/2021
Dear Mr. Webb,
Thanks for your work in ensuring that we have an effective recycling program. With regard to the
proposal presented on Friday, I have some questions and concerns.
Residents did not have much time to review the proposal from MGT. The deadline for comments and
questions should be extended.
Comments and Questions:
1) CR&R is supposed to divert 40% of trash from landfills, yet the proposal sets the diversion rate
at well above 40%. Are we trying to comply with another goal set by the state, and are we truly
required to do so? The Senate bill 1016 has been in place since 2008, and it does not appear
that we have complied with its 50% goal since it was enacted.
2) How much of the rate increase will be paid to CR&R?
3) Do we know for certain whether there is additional trash to be picked out for recycling, or are
we chasing an unattainable goal? In other words, how do we know that if we spend more that
we will get more diversion?
4) The Diversion Rates in Newport Beach are affected by homeless people who dig through
peoples' trash. Was this considered when coming up with actual or targeted diversion rates?
Diversion rates can also be impacted by construction related trash, where the recent
construction boom can drive actual diversion rates lower despite the effort made to recycle all
recyclables.
5) How are the Annual Recycling Contract Costs determined? This number of $2.3 million has no
breakdown. It is not clear how much of it is equipment, energy cost, personnel cost,
management cost, and executive management cost. If CR&R does not spend the full $2.3
million on actual direct costs related to the increase in diversion, the City would not be able to
prove it.
6) Has there been an audit on the Diversion Ratio by an independent third party other than MGT?
CR&R is requesting an increase in fees, and this Diversion Ratio is the key driver of the request.
Diversion rates can be impacted, for instance, by source reduction (California Bill 1016. Chapter
343) — can we see a breakdown of how our diversion rates are impacted by source reduction,
recycling, and composting? Would our diversion rates be more favorable if we counted all of
the professional tree trimmers' waste in addition to the green waste found in our trash?
Regards,
Murphy McCann