HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-17-1997 Meeting
I
I
I
ENGINEERING SERVICES
SUBCOMMITIEE MEETING
COMMITIEE ROOM 10:00 A.M.
JANUARY 17, 1997
PRESENT: CHAIllMAN MOSES TODD, RANDY OLIVER, ADMINISTRATOR, JIM WALL, ATTY.,
JIM LEIPER, STEVE SMITH, DAVID SMITH, NATHANIEL CHARLES, ROY PIPER, ROBERT
WATSON, LENA BONNER, CLERK OF COMMISSION, BELINDA BROWN, 'CLERK, 'TV 26.' :'.,.
RE: ILLEGAL DUMPING AND COMMERCIAL DUMPSTERS
On the issue that we are here for, illegal dumping, litter patrol,
dumping ~n commercial dumpsters.
Mr. Todd:
and unauthorized
Mr. Oliver: One of the things that I have been amazed by in traveling through
the county since I've been here is the amount of illegal dumping that we have.
And I frankly think that there is a lot of incentive to do illegal dumping.
And the reason that I think that there is an incentive, is because as I understand
it there is no mandatory collection ordinance.
Mr. Todd: Correct. In the unincorporated areas or the suburban area there
is no mandatory collection ordinance, there is, in the city which the government
is responsible for the collection for various dumping.
Mr. Oliver: Yes, I was aware of that. Let me relate some experience.
In Florida, what we did, because there were a lot of rural areas and there tended
to be a lot illegal dumping, what we elected to do, was to divide the county
up into franchise areas and we bid out garbage service within those areas. And
we wound up putting it on what was called a non advalorem assessment on the
advaloremibi1l for garbage collection. The net effect of that ment, that a
person paid for garbage service whether they used it or they didn't use it.
So consequently there became little or no incentive to do illegal dumping, there
.became little or no incentive to put refuse in a commercial container. We did
have mandatory collection for commercial accounts and this way we didn't require
them be part of that service. But to renew their business license, they had
to present a contract with a hauler, which showed that they had contracted for
those services. So, one of the items that we may wish to consider, is, the other
thing is from a citizens point of view, it makes it much more economical, because
in a given area rather than my contracting with BFI and you are contracting
with waste or somebody else on three different properties, one hauler would
pick up everybody in this district and there are economies of scale that can
be achieved by doing that which promote an over all rate, more effective rate.
Mr. David Smith: I think that with the program that we have starting February
2, we've got a jump, heading in that direction, and I have to agree with you.
It's good for everybody all the way around, because we do have a major problem
with every dumpster in the southern part of the county getting filled up with
other peoples waste stream. And behind buildings, its been that if somebody
moves out, vacates a building, the next thing you know we have a major problem
behind it. With the six districts that we have set up in the old urban area,
that gives us a test pattern to start from. We've got that coming under private
contract February 2, and the only thing we have to do is start identifying future
districts, get the support of the people in those areas, and I know that if
I was a property owner in one of those districts, number one I would get a better
rate fee, and better service, however it was charged, and the way that you were
talking about is the correct way to do it. Number one, I would rather have
one service in my area, it's good for law enforcement, because, people traveling
those areas know who is in those areas, you don't have thirty different companies
in there. It's a known fact in larger cities that works better advantageous to
the community. They have better equipment, its cheaper for them to operate,
because they don't have to pick up every third or fourth house, allover the
county, they have a combined area, so they can give you better service for less
money and it does cut down on the illegal dumping.
I
Mr. Piper: What are these six districts?
Mr. David Smith: The new six districts that will start February 2, that
were approved are in the urban area of Augusta, the old city limits. What we
did was get rid of the city waste service and we will start private contractors
in those areas, and it will be a good test pattern to see what we can do and
how it works and we can expand that, its good for the economics of my operation
as well.
Mr. Oliver: Another thing we had was flow control. Because we had flow
control that way and we totally controlled where the waste goes.
Mr. Todd: That's one that's going to get us into a lot of trouble.
Mr, Oliver: I think that if we do it through the franchise agreement,
I don't think that poses a problem.
Mr. Todd: One of the issues that I have as far as that goes, where I would
support it is that the wear and tear of the streets in your subdivisions when
the commercial waste service make turns and hit curbings, they do a lot of damage
and just the wear and tear in and out, if you have several trucks going in and I
out verses one, I think that is a plus, and we backed off of the flow control
issue and we call it "waste designation" in the sense that we've had with Randy
Cornell and some of the guys from waste management we've had some major run
ins, and finally we got a Mr. Ford out of the Chicago Public Affairs office
to give Randy a call and we got them off of our backs. I do understand that
if we had franchise agreements, and if the govenrment was responsible for the
pickup that we could do source designation.
Mr. Oliver: The other thing I would note, Mr. Todd, is what you said about
the truck, what we did was specify in the franchise agreement the type of
equipment to be used, to minimize the impact on the neighbor and on the street.
Mr. Todd: When we were doing the six districts, Mr. Piper, as Mr. Smith
had mentioned, one of the reasons we wanted to do the out sourcing in the urban
district first and see how that worked, and we have plans if it worked to go
district by district possibly. I don't know. what the general law says, as far
as an assessment fee in lu of an advalorem tax) but if I remember correctly
we would have to get 51% of the districts to agree to waste pick-up and to have
a special assessment for tha~.
Mr. Wall: The consolidation bill gives you the right to create special
tax districts and special service districts which is a new authorization from
the one that you had before consolidation. So, I think that under the consolidation
bill you could create a special service district as well as a special tax district
to take care of mandatory gargabe pick-up in a designated area, you just have
to go in arid'designatecthe:pockets or"sl'otscthat you wanted.
I
Mr. Oliver: The argument that
it uniform. What we did in Florida
base it on the assesed value of the
I have, and I don't know that we could do
is, we had a vehicle where we could either
property or what I call a user fee. Because
I
I
I
the user fee for gargabe is much more equitable than advalorem, because a
fifty thousand dollar property, and in fact, I have seen case studies that show
they may generate more waste than a two hundred thousand dollar property, because
of everything considered, and we did it uniformly. Can we do it uniformly,
so we would charge each household the same amount for the same service provided?
Mr. Wall: I don't think has to be an advalorem tax, it just says tax district
and how you define that tax, it could.be for family unit or whatever.
Mr. Piper: That tends to be regressive, doesn't it?
Mr. Oliver: Yes, but the problem with it is, that the two hundred thousRnd
dollar property owner will come in an argue that they have a trash compactor
in their house, therefore, they generate less, and the reality is that people
with lower incomes tend to buy more disposable items, if you really do the study.
It's regressive, but I think it's fair.
Mr. Piper: Montclair, which has an unusual set of covenants which are
enforceable more than most places, is revising these covenants, and they are
moving toward a single service in Montclair, whether they get that done or not
I don't know, that may be a unit that might go to a single service.
Mr. Charles: Mr. Todd, thats one of the things that we are working on
is to revise our covenant, and under the revision, that would be one thing that
we want to get in there, is to go to a standard type of collection system, where
as we get one hauler to do it.
Mr. Todd: Outside of a franchise agreement, the only way that I can see
that happening is that everybody in the subdivision agrees to one hauler, and
that certainly would work, other than that I would be afraid of the law suits,
etc.. I think that we need to make an issue, or at least, one of the main
priorities to go to a mandatory hauler per household, is to look at a resolution
drawn up by the county attorney to go with the districts that are not in the
urban services districts. The part of the district that is not covered in district
one in the urban services district, and all the other districts go for waste
franchising. If the county attorney can draw a resolution, that would be a
start.
Mr. Oliver: Would we move toward a special assessment district?
Mr. Todd: Yes, special assessment district.
Mr. Oliver: I'll agree with that.
Mr. Todd: Does everyone agree with that?
Every one agrees.
Mr. Oliver: The other thing that I think we should seriously look at,
and I don't know the legal aspect of it. Jim and I talked about it and we think
that it can be done. Right now we have a number of people that come to the
landfill that do not have the appropriate covering over their truck, and I would
like to, and Jim says he believes we can work this out, I believe we should
ticket them right there at the gate.
Mr. Smith: I have that authority already, as a Deputy Sheriff, I can do
that on the spot.
Mr. Todd:
cover. We need
so we can do an
I think that
to designate
eye audit of
is a good issue, state law says that you need to have a
an area where the individual can remove the cover
the vehicle.
Mr. Smith: We call it an unsecured load under state law and of
transporting refuse in a vehicle not secured is under our ordinance.
course.
Mr. Todd: Per EPD, the Department of Community Affairs, we are responsible
of policing of one mile from the landfill in either direction. And certainly
that would help us there too, as far as litter patrol.
Mr. Oliver: ne oth~r thing that I have seen done that is very effective,
we charged previously a five dollar a ton surcharge on solid waste, for cleanup.
We basically charged five dollars a ton recognizing that trash gets places you
don't want it, and we took that money and applied it to Public Works, or whereever
to use for cleanup.
Mr. Todd: Our tipping fee is now thirty dollars a ton, and we are competing
at this time with another entity that is hauling waste out of state, and
we don't want to drive any of our customers over to their transfer station,
so I would suggest or recommend that we don't do anything about fee structure
now, for tipping fee, and that we may look at doing it after we have the
franchise deal in place, once we have the franchise ordinance in place, certainly
the only waste that would be out there would be industrial and commercial waste.
Mr. Wall: Let me mention this, we don't hear much about it, Randy and
I spoke briefly about it, we have a lot small haulers that will be impacted
if you go areas. Although, you can divide up the territory some what, and make
it small enough so that they can compete. Will you waive the bond requirements,
or will you have the bond requirements in their insurance requirements? A lot
of the things that you typically are going to want to impose on that contract
is to insure that he lives up to his obligations. I have sent some of the
Commissioners copies of articles out of the Atlanta Constitution, from Fulton
County, chose to go this route, and a lot of the small haulers showed up on
the Commission door step, and I think that they basically rescinded the action.
Some neighborhoods preferred to have their own contractors. You need to decide
what kind of criteria you will have. If they do "x" amount of volume, you may
want certain insurance requirements. If they do greater volume, you may want
greater insurance. I don't know how you would justify that, I'll have to think
on that from an equal protection stand point.
Mr. Todd: In the contracts that we have now, we have a coalition on small
haulers and large haulers, and some small and minority and its a good mix, and
sizable haulers and I think we can make it work. I would think that we can
do the same, certainly I'm sure before we would implement this ordinance we
would have the haulers in and figure out how we would make it work for them.
But, whether we go to a franchise operation or not, I do think that we will
have to go to a minimum requirement for haulers to haul municipal solid waste
on the back of a pickup truck should not be allowed. This law has to be enforced.
If they understand that we will enforce this law, it will have an adverse affect
.on them whether we go to franchise or not and by going to the franchise it may
help them become better financially able to get equipment and insurance and
performance bids, etc.
Mr. Oliver: This is where we need to help in the Neighborhood Associations,
becuase it will really boil down to an issue between the neighborhoods and some
of the haulers who think they may lose their opportunity.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Charles: The biggest problem with these small haulers is that in
some ways they appear to be unregulated, if you look at some of the vehicles
that they use, there is no insulation in the bed of the vehicle to prevent the
waste from running out, in most case there are no tarps, and right now most
of those guys are being regulated by the neighborhoods and we really don't have
any authority or power, except in cases where we can get the people that they
service to go along with us to stop them.
Mr. Todd: .Can we agree to do an immediate enforcement of the tarps and
that we will get with them and work out the requirements of the EPD and what
other communities are doiilg and give them a ninety day compliance on the other.
Mr. Watson: There is a local small haulers association.
Mr. Smith: I'll provide the county attorney with that and I believe its
an EPD regulation that states how it is to be transported. If you will agree,
we'll start giving out the regulation at the window to give them thirty days
to bring this up to compliance. The larger haulers are in compliance, in most
cases. As far as the illegal dumping is concerned, we found that when we ran
the enforcement groups that countered this illegal dumping, when we started
these under law enforcement agencies, we found that the people who did the illegal
dumping could have brought the material to the landfill for free, but didn't
want to be bothered by having to haul it to that point and source.
Mr. Oliver: With mandatory collection, we will bring the service to them.
and the franchise, and the negative
I think that we need to do a
with the Small Haulers Association
from them.
Mr. Todd: As far the mandatory collection
impact that it will have on the small haulers.
public notice and have a hearing and a meeting
and all interested parties so we can get input
Mr. Smith: I have had a couple of meetings with the larger of the small
haulers, such as Coleman Sanitation, Mr. Frank Miles. The system is that if
we went to this and he bid on it and got it, he could take that contract to
the bank, and get the proper equipment. I have talked to bank officials, they
would welcome it. They would be happy to work with them on getting the loan
to secure the proper equipment, and every small hauler told me, that the biggest
problem they have is getting people to pay. This way they would not have this
problem. They would have a guaranteed source of income for the service provided,
it would benefit their business, they would have the proper funds to get the
proper equipment and do a better service. We will have a waste monitors that
will make sure that everything is done properly.
Mr. Oliver: The other issues that we need to be insightful about as part
of the franchise agreement is to provide for separate horticular pickup as well.
We have to make provisions for white goods, batteries, paint, and tires. Tires
here are a major problem,. and I think that is somewhat in part that the state
is remiss in the way they are doing that.
Mr. Todd: An issue that we need to take up is the builders ordinance and
code and work through the license and inspection office and bring them in on
a meeting as far as their requirements are there. Dumping on a lot that they
are selling can cause decay.
Mr. Todd: To recap what we have decided to do:
Propose a mandatory collection, franchise it out on an assessment fee basis
and enforce covering the trucks immediately, look at the criteria according I
to the law for haulersand give them thirty to ninety daysto come in compliance
with that.
Mr.Oliver: We will put a fee in the rate to cover white good pickup and
we will do pickup with a call forty eight to seventy two hours in advance.
I would like to do it as a Georgia law as a non advalorem as~essment on the
adva10rem bill. We will have to do a separate mailing and a separate collection,
this will be fairly costly, probably two dollars a bill. We need to verify
the time, as to when we need to have the district set up, when we would have
to levy the assessment to get it on there, this will insure one hundred percent
payment.
Mr. Todd: Would this disqualify the landfill as a franchise operation
or would it remain a franchise operation?
Mr. Oliver: Its an enterprise operation right now, so its self supporting.
I think what we should do is lower the tax rate and put everybody on as a non
advalorem assessment so that everybody is treated the same way. We would only
reduce the part for gargabe at this point.
Mr. Todd: Street lights are being paid for also, therefore;.:we need-to look
at the big picture and try to do an adjustment on the service districts where
the assessment would be for garbage pickup and street lights.
Mr. Leiper:
sure the haulers
flag pole lots.
I think flag pole lots need to be addressed. We need to make
are aware that they shouldn't be riding the street servicing
I
Mr. Oliver: The property owners need to bring trash out to a public
thorough fare.
Mr. Todd: Is there any way we could do a local assessment on a tire when
its sold here?
Mr. Oliver: A state law in Florida assessed two dollars for each used tire,
you brought the tire into a collection center that was approved by the state
and received one dollar back. There was a big incentive to bring the tire
in to be recylced.
Mr. Todd: Lets lobby thru the ACCG, asking the state to help take care of the
tire problem, instead of giving out grants that they would have a collection
point and pay anyone a dollar for the tire.
Mr. Oliver: The state collects a fee for tires, I just don't know what
they do with it.
Mr. Smith: The state uses the money for illegal tire clean up.
Mr. Todd:
cash in on what
Lets see if we can do a local assessment, and see if we can
the state is doing as far as tires are concerned.
I
I
,I
I
Mr. Todd: Recommend to Engineering Services Committee then to full
Commission to have a liter patrol under the Marshall's Department with the
understanding that these people will only be used for this function only.
We have two recommendations:
(1) The resolution instituting the mandatory gargabe pickup through
franchise.
(2) Implement a new enforcement for liter patrol to be under the
Marshall's Department.
ADJOURNMENT: With no furcher business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.
Lena J. Bonner
bjb