CC Minutes - 06/11/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

consultant, was also present. Ms. Young provided the staff presentation, describing the current system of solid waste collection, which she characterized as providing customer choice, competition, opportunity for growth, and requiring a minimal government involvement in enforcement. Downsides to the system were the difficulties haulers had enforcing recycling standards without fear of losing customers; overlapping routes, which wasted fuel, contributed to road degradation, and produced more noise and congestion; higher rates due to noncontiguous accounts; containers out on the same street on different days for as many as four different haulers; and difficulty in achieving regional strategies because of disparity among local collection systems. Ms. Young noted the impact residential rates experineced in the last ten years, which was created by the separation of residential and commercial expenses for haulers, during which time residential rates increased and there had been no commercial increase at all; by the institution of recycling rebates that artificially inflated the rates; and by the City's decision in 1994 to implement progressive rates, which resulted in a situation where the fixed costs had remained the same but there were fewer customers in larger containers to pay those costs, spreading costs throughout the system onto customers with smaller, less expensive containers. In addition, noncontiguous collection routes also added to the cost. A change to territories would result in a more efficient collection system. Ms. Young reported that surveys indicated a high level of customer satisfaction with the current system, noting that the response was similar to responses in other communities with different systems, which she believed reflected satisfaction with the service rather than the collection system. She reported that 46 percent of survey respondents indicated no need for a change in the system; the remainder indicated acceptance of change under certain conditions. Ms. Young reported that focus groups of residential and commercial customers were held; the residential focus groups indicated a preference for choice, and the commercial groups preferred exclusive residential and commercial franchises. Commercial customers favored blended rates; residential customers were split on the issue. Ms. Young said that a survey of 20 Oregon cities with 20,000 or more people indicated that Eugene was the only city without an exclusive franchise system for residential customers. Eugene had the fifth highest residential rates and fourth lowest commercial rates; Springfield had the lowest residential rates and seventh lowest commercial rates. Only Eugene and Portland do not subsidize residential rates with commercial revenue. Ms. Young noted support for the status quo from haulers. She said if a franchise system was adopted by the City, the haulers were concerned that territories be selected in a fair manner that maintained existing revenues and provided an opportunity for growth. All haulers supported blending the commercial and residential rates. Ms. Young reviewed options developed by staff for proceeding: 1) institute an exclusive franchise system; and 2) retain the status quo with modifications to the administrative rules. Ms. Young highlighted the staff recommendation for blended rates. She invited questions. Mr. Meisner asked if the City ever contemplated allowing new haulers to enter the competition for licensing. Ms. Young said there were provisions in the City Code that allowed a new hauler to apply for and be granted a license. That hauler would have to demonstrate it could provide a service not now offered. Mr. Meisner asked if a new residential hauler could offer a service so unique they could secure a license. Ms. Young said it could be possible. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 11, 2001 Page 3 Work Session