SAN ANSELMO: Consideration of 2010-2020 MMS Franchise belongs to New Council Membership.

Who wrote this page?

Louise L Mathews, a ratepayer who has reviewed garbage service contracts since the mid 1990’s. She corrected Auditor’s Report, which reduced rates even further than Council considered. She studied the Request for Proposals and the Questions and each responder’s Proposal to the RFP Sub-Committee.

The MSS Proposals and contract amendments were proficient and any lack of information that now lead’s to a claim from MSS that the Franchise is a financial disadvantage is their liability. Council assured the San Anselmo ratepayers that they were going to get better service, lower rates, minimal service charges, and compliance with mandated waste reduction. If MSS failed to meet its pronounced merit, it cannot leave way for Town Council to exploit the ratepayers.

The intent of this page is to inform ratepayers why the pending San Anselmo rate increase, loss of service, and new charges should not be approved, but should be reevaluated from the ratepayer’s perspective.

• Year 2000: MSS reduced their rates after existing contractor agrees to Town service stipulations and lower rates. MMS is awarded the Franchise 2002 after a private deal is brokered with Town officials and then MSS lowers its rates.

• Year 2009: MSS President Garbarino informs Refuse & Recycling Committee that the $2.8 million purportedly lost due to lowering their rates to win the San Anselmo contract has already been recouped by increasing the rates in other towns serviced by MSS. Why should San Anselmo pay MSS another $2.8 million?

• Year 2009: Hilton & Farnkopf (longstanding auditors for MSS) completes a rate review indicating rates should be increased and new service charges levied.

• Year 2009: Town Manager Stutsman and the Refuse &Recycling Committee agree that San Anselmo will join the Franchisors Group. Town Managers gain greater control to act without consumer/ratepayer input that restrain and reduce the amount of annual rate increases.

• Year 2009: New dual sort carts for recycling will be required. The carts, according to MSS, will be owned by the Town government and have an 8-year life. Rate percentage increased to cover the cost of the carts, meaning additional rate increases will increase on top of initial increase. Is this percentage markup cost justifiable or MSS profit?

• Contract Items: Page 18/74; MSS shall pay Town of San Anselmo government $43,600 for the use to travel on Town streets to carry Solid Water (sic), Recyclable Materials and Green Waste. NOTE from llm: Already a cost is included in the rates for the Road Impact Fee received in the Road Maintenance Fund (Is this a second fee of $43,600?)

• Contract Items: Page 18/74; MMS shall pay Town government a 10% Franchise Fee of MSS gross receipts except Debris Boxes franchise fee shall be 2% of gross receipts. Town reserves the right to modify the Franchise Fee with an associated adjustment in the rates.

FRANCHISE FEE and STREET TRAVEL RIGHTS costs are added into the Customer Rates.

Agenda Item 3 Available on line at www.townofsananselmo.org/meetings

• Contract Items: Page 25/81; Company and Town may approve a residential and commercial foodwaste/compost collection program and modify the rates as appropriate.

• Recommendation by R&R: 27.40% rate increase and a Step Two Franchisors Group Increase of 6.31%, resulting in a 33.71& rate increase. Additional rate increase

• Franchise Contract is required to run until 2015 in order to recover the costs of the dual sort cart system. MSS is requesting a 10-year contract. Although not an Evergreen Franchise, MSS structures review to complicate a bidding process.

• NOTES from llm: RECYCLING CARTS require a 6.5% rate increase for split body trucks and a 2.8% increase for the carts. The 2.8% carts will increase every year when the future rates are adjusted upward. Why not charge the customer the cost of the cart, which they would then own? MSS proposed to add a percentage cost to the customer rates and give ownership of the carts to the Town government when the carts degraded in 8 years.

• Currently, recycling is included in the cost of the Franchise Agreement rates. MSS proposes that the Recycling charges be added. This is an awkward part of the Franchise relationship with MSS. Rates based on MSS expenses, not on MSS profits. In this regard, in 2002, the ratepayer was sacrificed by Franchise language that allowed MSS to separate out Recycling profits (under their Marin Resource & Recovery Company) while placing the expenses to gain those profits into the customer rates. 2002 Council was made aware of this issue, and ignored its consequence.

• I just received the actual STAFF REPORT and am amazed at the detailed contract and rate-setting methodology that was not even available to the R&R Sub-Committee (or the public) in Sept 2009.

THERE IS NO NEED TO RUSH THIS PROCESS WITH THE EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP. Council members Ford Green & Barbara Thornton represented Council on the R&R Sub-Committee and the incoming Council can review the 4 inches of material that Town Manager Stutsman has accumulated.

Any consideration of an increase must be approved through a public process that is not layered between two holidays (Veteran’s Day and Thanksgiving). MSS can, as was efficiently accomplished by the previous provider, backdate the rate increase and implementation of special charges to Jan 1. 2010 for billing purposes.

This is a NEW FRANCHISE AGREEMENT that is different in material ways. When I write “material”, I mean MSS and the Town government are the benefactors of the Franchise. The ratepayers are just a funding method without representation.

If Recycling Split Carts are not approved, the contract can be fewer years, allowing for effective consumer influence and the Rate Increase will decrease to 18.1%.

Council Meeting Nov 10, 2009 Item #3 (earliest item)

Meeting starts at 7 pm

llm