Utilities Rate Advisory Commission Meeting – August 28, 2019

The Utilities Rate Advisory Commission (URAC) met on August 28, 2019, to conduct a public hearing on a proposed three-and-a-half-year rate adjustment for Recycling and Solid Waste (RSW) services. After hearing public testimony and deliberating, the commission voted 5-2 to approve the rate adjustment and recommend it to the City Council.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of Minutes for July 24, 2019 – Passed unanimously (7-0).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Muriel Strand – Objected to the rate structure, not the overall amount. She argued that the smallest landfill can users pay 75% of the rate for a can twice as large, which is disproportionate. She called for a rate structure that incentivizes waste reduction.
• Brian Powers – Opposed the 37% increase over three years, questioning the need for such a large increase. He suggested delaying the CNG station and street sweeping improvements if the fund is at risk of insolvency, and argued that population growth should bring in more ratepayers, not increase costs.
• Mark Wenzel – Expressed general support for the increase but urged the commission to delay the $3.7 million CNG station investment and instead assess zero-emission vehicle options to align with the city’s carbon neutrality goals.
• Barbara Steinberg – Stated that services have diminished while costs have risen (e.g., weekly recycling reduced to bi-weekly, green waste changes). She said her combined city/county utilities have increased from $130 to $165 per month in four years, and many neighbors cannot afford the increases.
• Kieran Kumar (Walk Sacramento) – Recommended investing some of the revenue in increasing street sweeping on high-capacity bike routes and purchasing a specialized sweeper for protected bike facilities, noting that bike lane obstructions are a safety issue.
• Thomas Wallace – Proposed a barcode scanning system on trash cans to charge per actual pickup, as he rarely fills his cans. He also questioned the effectiveness of street sweeping.
• Doug Bigart – Expressed concern about an additional food waste bin, as he already composts. He also doubted the value of increased street sweeping.
• Rostam Blasne Masadisheni – Noted his utility rates have increased 75% over ten years while his government salary has not kept pace. He argued that expenses are rising while services decrease, and questioned the city’s financial management.
• Ricardo Bellman – Echoed that fees are increasing faster than salaries, and services have declined (e.g., recycling from weekly to bi-weekly, leaf pickup delays). He called the increases unfair.
• William Glenn – Protested the rate increase, stating that with all the new development, the city should be able to manage costs without raising rates. He also mentioned the homeless issue and trash theft.
• Sang Sue – Opposed the increase, stating he has never seen a street sweeper in his area in ten years. He argued that rate increases will lead to higher rents and increased homelessness.
• Stephanie Becker – Asked if a self-haul option exists for solid waste.
• Juan Lopez – Opposed the increase, saying he is charged for recycling service he does not use. He supported a pay-per-use model and argued that recyclers should not be charged because the city makes money from recyclables.

Discussion Items

• Presentation by Jerome Council, Integrated Waste General Manager – Staff presented factors driving the rate increase: Senate Bill 1383 (unfunded mandate for food waste diversion by 2022), China’s National Sword policy (0.5% contamination limit, causing recycling costs to rise), need for a CNG fueling station ($3.7 million), population growth (4,000 new accounts since 2015, projected 18,000 more in 3–5 years), increased street sweeping frequency (from every six weeks to every four weeks), rising disposal costs (30% increase since 2013), and labor cost increases (14% since 2013). The five-year fund forecast without a rate increase would leave the solid waste fund insolvent by 2022. The proposed rate increases are 7.43% (Jan 2020), 7.49% (FY 2021), 7.49% (FY 2022), and 7.52% (FY 2023), totaling $12.33 per month for a 64-gallon container. A total of 124 valid protests were received out of 138,888 notices mailed (0.09% protest rate). The SURA program (rate assistance) has 8,000 participants, who will not be impacted by the increase.
• Commissioner Questions and Deliberation – Commissioners discussed:
  • The proportionality of rates for different can sizes. Staff stated that garbage rates are tiered based on can size and are cost-based, but recycling and yard waste rates are flat.
  • The life of the CNG station (expected long-term).
  • The impact of SB 1383 on households without green waste service (11,000–12,000 accounts will need to be served).
  • The suggestion that small cans may be subsidizing larger cans due to the midday trip to the transfer station. Commissioner Megan Fidel argued that the small-can share of costs is too high, and that the rate structure may have Prop 218 issues.
  • Commissioner Andrew Day requested that the actual written protests be provided to the City Council before a final decision.
  • Commissioner Brian Beering suggested verifying the SURA program data with SMUD and increasing outreach to fixed-income residents.

Key Outcomes

• Motion to approve the proposed three-and-a-half-year rate adjustment for Recycling and Solid Waste services – Passed 5-2. Voting yes: Chair April Javis, Melissa Lee, Brian Beering, Rachel Ann Vanderwerf, Andrew Day. Voting no: Megan Fidel, Anthony Thomas.
• Next Steps – Staff will present the rate ordinance to the City Council in September/October 2019 for implementation starting January 1, 2020.