On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order – Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   Pledge of Allegiance

   The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

   ▶ Jump to 0:33 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:34] an agenda. My agenda says let's [00:00:36] do in the pledge of allegiance. [00:00:38] All of that. All of this. [00:00:45] Sorry. Pledge allegiance to the [00:00:47] flag of the United States of [00:00:49] America to the Republic for [00:00:51] which it stands one nation [00:00:53] under God invisible with [00:00:55] indivisible with liberty and [00:00:57] justice for all. All right.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 4.a

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Section 1043” — transcript expanded below

   First Reading, Ordinance No. 2023-2282: Modification of the Solid Waste Collection System

   approved

   First reading of Ordinance 2023-2282 amending Chapter 10, Article 2 of the city code to support a transition from a free-market multi-hauler solid waste system to a single-hauler franchise system. The ordinance establishes a mandatory fee for property owners, allows collection via non-ad valorem assessment or billing, increases insurance requirements (to $1M/$2M liability and $100K property damage), adds Juneteenth as a holiday, requires GPS/cameras on equipment, and excludes C&D debris haulers. Council passed first reading 3-0 with an amendment to retain 'or occupant' language in section 1024(B) to preserve flexibility in billing methods.

   Ord. Ordinance No. 2023-2282

   • motion:Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance 2023-2282 with amendment to retain 'or occupant' language in section 1024(B) (eliminate that strikeout). (passed)3–0

   👤Councilman Altman👤Councilman Murphy👤Councilman Peters👤Mr. Rivera#Chapter 10 Article 2 Solid Waste Collection#Consumer Price Index rate basis#Juneteenth holiday addition#Ordinance No. 2023-2282#RFP for solid waste collection franchise#Section 1022#Section 1024(B)#Section 1043#Solid Waste Collection Franchise Fee (10%)#non-ad valorem assessment#single hauler franchise system

   ▶ Jump to 1:00 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:01:03] Public reading of ordinance [00:01:06] number twenty twenty three [00:01:07] twenty two eighty seven [00:01:08] modification solid waste [00:01:10] collection system. This is [00:01:12] ordinance number twenty twenty [00:01:13] three twenty two eighty two an [00:01:15] ordinance of the city of [00:01:16] New Port Richey Florida [00:01:17] providing for amendment of [00:01:18] article two of chapter ten of [00:01:20] the New Port Richey code of [00:01:21] ordinances pertaining to solid [00:01:23] waste collection providing for [00:01:24] a mandatory fee for all [00:01:25] property owners in the city for [00:01:27] solid waste collection [00:01:28] providing criteria for [00:01:29] determining the fee providing [00:01:31] for collection thereof [00:01:32] including the use of non [00:01:34] abnormal assessments providing [00:01:35] for separate construction and [00:01:37] demolition debris collection [00:01:38] providing for increased [00:01:40] insurance requirements for [00:01:41] collectors providing for [00:01:42] indemnification providing [00:01:43] miscellaneous requirements [00:01:45] providing penalties for [00:01:46] violation hereof providing for [00:01:48] enforcement providing for [00:01:49] conflict severability and an [00:01:51] effective date. As you know [00:01:54] Mr. Mayor members of the city [00:01:56] council for some time now [00:01:58] discussion has taken place in [00:02:02] respect to the single hauler [00:02:09] system rather than the free [00:02:11] market system which we [00:02:13] currently subscribe to for [00:02:16] solid waste pickup and [00:02:18] hauling services. In that [00:02:20] regard three years ago we did [00:02:23] put on notice the five hauling [00:02:26] companies that currently [00:02:28] provide service in the city [00:02:30] that we would be competitively [00:02:32] bidding for service the solid [00:02:36] waste collection franchise [00:02:40] opportunity for the city. [00:02:42] And we have done so and at this [00:02:45] point this evening as indicated [00:02:47] by the city attorney we have a [00:02:49] new ordinance that we would [00:02:51] like you to consider which [00:02:53] details some of the provisions [00:02:56] which will need to be [00:02:57] effectuated to support the new [00:02:59] system and Mr. Rivera is [00:03:01] prepared to present those [00:03:02] changes to you this evening. [00:03:04] Thank you. [00:03:06] As you all are aware this is an [00:03:08] ordinance that has been on the [00:03:10] books for quite some time. [00:03:12] We're just now updating it to [00:03:14] go ahead and fit this proposed [00:03:16] single hauler collection system [00:03:18] that we have before you. We'll [00:03:20] be bringing to you the first [00:03:22] meeting in September. And so [00:03:25] the existing system that we [00:03:27] have is a single hauler [00:03:29] collection system. It's a [00:03:31] single hauler collection system [00:03:33] and so the existing system that [00:03:35] we have it's annual solid waste [00:03:37] special permit that the vendors [00:03:41] have to apply for and then [00:03:43] council approves them and then [00:03:45] it's good for a year from [00:03:47] January 1 to December 31. So [00:03:49] some of the first changes that [00:03:51] we made on page 1 you'll look [00:03:56] there and it will say about the [00:03:58] first paragraph bold print in [00:04:00] the middle you'll see [00:04:01] construction and demolition [00:04:03] debris. We added demolition [00:04:07] because that's the type of [00:04:08] collection that is not going to [00:04:11] be regulated by this ordinance. [00:04:14] There is one hauler that [00:04:16] strictly all he does is do C&D [00:04:19] materials, building materials, [00:04:21] those roll off dumpsters that [00:04:23] you see. We can't govern or [00:04:25] mandate any guidelines for that [00:04:27] type of hauler. So you'll still [00:04:30] see a company if a company does [00:04:33] that type of service you'll [00:04:36] still see the different types [00:04:37] in the city operating. So on [00:04:40] page 2 if you look down at the [00:04:42] last paragraph item number 1 [00:04:45] well I'm sorry in the middle of [00:04:48] the paragraph section 1022 we [00:04:51] talk about the different types [00:04:53] of containers that you have to [00:04:56] have. It will allow us to be [00:04:59] able later on if you all wanted [00:05:01] to in the second year, third [00:05:03] year or what have you want to [00:05:04] implement a different type of [00:05:06] container that you typically see [00:05:08] we've tried to think of that [00:05:10] type of language to where we [00:05:11] wouldn't have to come back to [00:05:12] you several times. The last [00:05:16] paragraph talks about we've [00:05:18] taken out language that says [00:05:21] any permit holder and inserted [00:05:23] the solid waste collections [00:05:25] HIZ. Page 3 the continuation [00:05:32] with the same edits where we [00:05:33] took out the permit hauler. [00:05:35] Item number 4 was removed. This [00:05:38] talks about the customers that [00:05:41] live along alleys taking in [00:05:45] having their house number on the [00:05:48] back side and having the area [00:05:51] that's designated for the [00:05:53] collection. We are going to be [00:05:55] presenting the RFP for award [00:05:57] after we do the RFP if you guys [00:06:01] award it then the next thing [00:06:03] we'll do is we'll do a contract [00:06:05] and the contract will detail all [00:06:08] of the methodology that we're [00:06:09] going to be using with the [00:06:11] contractor so we felt like when [00:06:15] we get into the position to be [00:06:17] able to start to pick up trash [00:06:20] in the alleys depending on which [00:06:22] ones are accessible then we can [00:06:25] work those details out between [00:06:27] the property owners as well as [00:06:29] the contractor. If you go down [00:06:33] to item number B it is talking [00:06:40] about the different types of [00:06:44] properties that are in the city [00:06:46] their functions in other words [00:06:48] any property that has five or [00:06:51] fewer units would be considered [00:06:53] residential trash collection. It [00:06:56] talks about assessing those [00:06:59] people through the non-ad valorem [00:07:01] assessments. It also talks about [00:07:05] commercial size, what constitutes [00:07:07] a commercial customer. And then [00:07:12] of course it talks about on the [00:07:14] next page, page 4, it talks [00:07:16] about us doing our true ups with [00:07:18] the level of service that we [00:07:20] have that may change during the [00:07:22] year so that we can true up at [00:07:24] the end of that year. The [00:07:27] collection hours and days, we [00:07:29] did add Juneteenth to that list [00:07:32] and that basically talks about [00:07:35] as well as if the contractor is [00:07:37] allowed to take those days off [00:07:39] but then he must pick up and [00:07:41] meet the following day. [00:07:43] In our next page, page 5, we [00:07:46] talk about the commercial [00:07:48] collections and those commercial [00:07:52] collections are allowed between [00:07:54] 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through [00:07:58] Saturday. And then we go down [00:08:02] to the division 2, solid waste [00:08:04] collections franchise special [00:08:06] permits and this is the [00:08:08] earlier as far as the C&D [00:08:10] materials where that vendor or [00:08:13] vendors would still have to [00:08:15] continue to operate under the [00:08:17] existing special permit system [00:08:19] that we have now. We go to page [00:08:24] 6, item number 5, we talk about [00:08:30] the commercial collections and [00:08:32] those commercial collections [00:08:34] are allowed between 6 a.m. and [00:08:38] 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday. [00:08:40] Page 7, item number 4, we've [00:08:46] increased the insurance amounts [00:08:48] that the contractor will have to [00:08:50] carry and then added some hold [00:08:56] harmless language to the [00:08:58] ordinance. Page number 7, item [00:09:03] number 5, we talk about the [00:09:05] liability insurance. What kind [00:09:07] of percent increases the [00:09:09] insurance that they cover? Do [00:09:11] you have any idea? Are the [00:09:13] different companies all different [00:09:15] types of liability insurance? [00:09:19] Were you going to answer that or [00:09:22] did you want me to? [00:09:26] If you're asking the original [00:09:28] ordinance provided for $100,000 [00:09:31] and $200,000 per occurrence, [00:09:33] this is 1,000% increase over [00:09:35] that. We increased it to a [00:09:37] million per person and 2 million [00:09:39] per occurrence and we had four [00:09:41] times the amount for the [00:09:45] property damage which was only [00:09:47] $25,000 in the existing [00:09:49] ordinance. This ordinance goes [00:09:51] back to 1964 so that's when [00:09:53] those numbers were set. [00:09:55] Just the way the numbers were [00:09:57] underlined and marked out, I [00:09:59] don't know. [00:10:01] It can be a little confusing [00:10:03] but that is the way we're [00:10:05] supposed to do it by statute. [00:10:07] It doesn't mean I have to [00:10:09] understand it. [00:10:10] But it's a substantial increase [00:10:12] and they do meet with the [00:10:14] industry standards we checked [00:10:16] out to make sure we didn't [00:10:18] require insurance in excess of [00:10:20] what they generally have [00:10:22] anyway. [00:10:23] We go to page 7, item number [00:10:25] 6, we did add in here that the [00:10:27] developer must operate an [00:10:29] office here within the city [00:10:31] limits. [00:10:32] And item number 7, we also [00:10:34] wanted to include that their [00:10:36] equipment include cameras, GPS [00:10:38] units. [00:10:39] This is so that we can address [00:10:41] any types of concerns from [00:10:43] residents as they come. [00:10:46] And then the next section, 1043 [00:10:48] talks about every year by May [00:10:50] 1st, the different types of [00:10:52] items that the contractor is [00:10:54] supposed to submit to the city. [00:10:56] One being a name and a [00:10:58] registration number. [00:10:59] And then the other section, [00:11:01] 1043, talks about the [00:11:03] requirements for the contractor [00:11:05] to submit a name and a [00:11:07] registration number. [00:11:08] And then the last section, 1043, [00:11:10] talks about the requirements for [00:11:12] the contractor to submit a [00:11:15] name and street address of [00:11:17] everyone that they are [00:11:19] servicing. [00:11:20] Their level of service will be [00:11:22] confirmed, a complete list of [00:11:24] the employees, their equipment, [00:11:26] and those types of things. [00:11:28] Page number 8. [00:11:29] And then the last section, [00:11:31] 1043, talks about the [00:11:33] requirements for the [00:11:35] contractor to submit a [00:11:37] registration number. [00:11:38] And then the last section, [00:11:40] 1043, talks about the [00:11:42] requirements for the [00:11:44] contractor to submit a [00:11:46] name and street address. [00:11:48] And then the last section, [00:11:51] 1043, talks about the [00:11:53] requirements for the [00:11:55] contractor to submit a name [00:11:58] and street address. [00:12:00] And then the last section, [00:12:02] 1043, talks about the [00:12:05] requirements for the [00:12:07] contractor to submit and [00:12:09] then the place where the [00:12:11] application was made. [00:12:13] Page 10, first paragraph, [00:12:21] one, two, three, four, the [00:12:23] fourth line down, we've [00:12:25] removed some of the Florida [00:12:27] state statute, the [00:12:29] Administrative Procedure Act [00:12:31] language. [00:12:33] Page number 11, item number [00:12:39] three, it took out the [00:12:46] language stating that they [00:12:48] can't charge anything higher [00:12:50] than the Pasco County Board [00:12:52] of County Commissioners rate [00:12:54] amount. [00:12:55] And, of course, like we said, [00:12:57] we'll be basing our rates on [00:12:59] the Consumer Price Index, so [00:13:01] this language goes away. [00:13:03] And then item number four, [00:13:08] we've talked about the Solid [00:13:11] Waste Collection Franchise Fee [00:13:13] that is in existence. [00:13:15] If we're going to be [00:13:16] administering the program, [00:13:17] then whatever rate that the [00:13:20] hauler is charging, we will [00:13:22] pay him that rate according [00:13:24] to the contract minus the [00:13:26] 10% franchise fee. [00:13:28] And we would expect that our [00:13:32] collection, by processing it [00:13:34] this way, we would expect that [00:13:35] we would have 100% collection [00:13:36] of that franchise fee that [00:13:38] we've had for a few years now [00:13:40] that we don't really feel [00:13:42] confident that we're getting [00:13:44] 100% now. [00:13:45] Well, the auditing. [00:13:47] Right. [00:13:48] So. [00:13:49] It's questionable. [00:13:50] The auditing of that was [00:13:52] questionable, I think. [00:13:53] We are auditing it currently. [00:13:55] Yeah, no, I'm just saying the [00:13:56] auditing of five different [00:13:58] entities and anyhow. [00:14:02] So with that, we'll take any [00:14:04] questions you may have. [00:14:07] Well, it appears from what [00:14:10] you're telling me that in the [00:14:12] title of your ordinance, you're [00:14:14] providing for the use of [00:14:16] non-ad valorem assessment for [00:14:18] this and that you're [00:14:20] conflating the idea that we use [00:14:22] the non-ad valorem assessment [00:14:24] with the idea that we can [00:14:26] improve our collections. [00:14:29] And at our last meeting, there [00:14:31] was a discussion made where [00:14:33] Councilman Murphy suggested that [00:14:36] this would be a cheaper way of [00:14:38] doing things by using the [00:14:40] non-ad valorem process. [00:14:42] So I disagree with both of [00:14:45] those concepts. [00:14:47] I do support single hauler. [00:14:49] Single hauler is the issue that [00:14:51] should be in front of us today. [00:14:53] Putting in that we're going to [00:14:55] provide for non-ad valorem [00:14:57] assessment. [00:15:00] and that we're going to strike out the invoicing of renters from being able to pay it, [00:15:08] eliminates the opportunity to do anything but non-advalorum assessments. [00:15:13] Now, you're going to hold a public hearing, and you're going to write everybody in our city [00:15:17] and tell them that we're going to do this, and you're under the gun because you're at the last minute [00:15:22] to try to get this on the tax roll. [00:15:24] And I'm just suggesting to you that every property owner, including residents of our city, [00:15:30] that have been having their renters pay their water bills are going to now be told [00:15:36] that they're going to have an increase on their tax bill of a couple hundred dollars [00:15:41] or whatever it's going to be a year. [00:15:43] Now, to those of you who've signed some kind of a pledge against taxes, [00:15:49] I would defend you to say this is not a tax, it's an assessment. [00:15:53] But to those people who are snowbirds who come down in the winter and aren't here, [00:16:00] when they find out that they're going to be billed for 12 months' worth of garbage, [00:16:05] that they can't put their services on hold when they close their houses, [00:16:10] you've got a whole bunch of issues that are going to come out. [00:16:13] And I'll guarantee you they're going to come out. [00:16:16] So I'm asking for one thing. [00:16:19] Take out the strikeouts that eliminate the ability to do a different method of collecting. [00:16:25] Because when you say this bill goes to the owners of the property, [00:16:30] you can just as easily say, and not strike out, or the tenants or the users of that property. [00:16:37] Because I'm not done arguing this point, and I don't like being put in a position [00:16:43] where you're going to eliminate the opportunity for me to continue to argue. [00:16:47] We don't know what the charges are going to be. [00:16:49] We do know that there's a percent for collecting of a couple of percent. [00:16:53] And I know that that money is going to go out of our government and into another government. [00:16:59] I also know that there's people who may be property owners who are repairing their building, [00:17:05] who may have a dumpster, want to change to a different commercial period, [00:17:10] and that this represents work on our part as a city. [00:17:15] I also know that there is a solid waste division that can collect money [00:17:24] and contribute that back to the general operations, [00:17:27] and that the collection services that we have right now, where we could put it on the bill, [00:17:33] where Councilman Murphy said, oh, that would be two bills, it can be one bill. [00:17:39] We can still bill the renters. [00:17:41] That's going to be the preferred method. [00:17:43] The only problem is that you're continuing to tell us that your only way to collect all your money [00:17:49] is through the non-ad valorem assessment and putting this on the tax bill. [00:17:53] And I just have to say I don't agree with that, [00:17:56] that we could just as easily put an invoice out at the end of the year. [00:18:00] I'd leave in that the owners of the buildings and the properties are responsible for it. [00:18:05] I will tell you we can eliminate the argument that we have to put it on the tax bill, [00:18:12] but I would certainly like to see some numbers to show [00:18:16] how much money we're collecting from our residents to give to another government [00:18:20] and saying that that's cheaper than us doing it ourselves, [00:18:23] when we can just do it on our own [00:18:25] and potentially provide customer service to those folks who want to put it on hold. [00:18:31] Now, I know this is not the normal way. [00:18:34] I know this is being pushed. [00:18:36] Councilman Peters, who thought that we had to do this [00:18:40] because he's been waiting for his whole term of office to get it done, [00:18:44] that nothing would delay us from being able to impose this in January. [00:18:48] So my question is for our attorney, which is when you prepare this ordinance and you set it up, [00:18:55] which is really an insult to me, to eliminate the ability to do it any other way [00:19:01] but to send a separate bill to an owner because you're not allowing for this to be billed to the renters. [00:19:07] I don't understand why we can't keep that option in the ordinance. [00:19:11] Maybe it doesn't work out. [00:19:13] Maybe we find out we don't want to put it on the ad valorem next year. [00:19:16] Maybe we start looking at our water bills and seeing whether our deposits are high enough. [00:19:22] Maybe you tell us how much money we're really losing because we're not collecting it all from the renters. [00:19:27] Maybe we tighten up on our water utilities. [00:19:32] But what I'm told is, oh, that's another issue. [00:19:36] Well, we've had three years to discuss this issue, [00:19:39] and it also includes the chance that we may bill for the collection of yard debris [00:19:45] or what happens with yard debris. [00:19:48] Bottom line is this is a public hearing, and the public isn't aware of it, really. [00:19:54] I mean, you've maybe followed the level, but you're going to hear from them. [00:19:59] So I'm just asking that you, if you want my support, that you go to that one line, [00:20:05] and you'll see it in there that says owners, and you have written out on page three or occupant. [00:20:14] Why did you take occupant out? [00:20:17] If you like, I can address that, Mr. Mayor. [00:20:19] First of all, the ordinance does not compel you to use the non-ad valorem method. [00:20:25] I understand that. [00:20:26] So you do still have the opportunity to bill. [00:20:28] I don't see a problem with not striking or occupant to leave that open, so that can be changed. [00:20:35] That's my request. [00:20:36] I'll vote for this. [00:20:39] I want a fair chance to discuss what's the best. [00:20:42] I don't like being told something's cheaper when I'm not sure that it is [00:20:46] or that the residents are going to accept this or that we can't collect it another way. [00:20:51] If a motion to approve, you could just ask that the strikeout on subparagraph 1024B be eliminated for the occupant, [00:21:01] and then that would leave that door open to bill the occupant. [00:21:04] But this ordinance will still allow this fee to be collected by billing and or at non-ad valorem. [00:21:11] I understand that. [00:21:12] We had to do two bills because we have one bill to every occupant and one bill to the renter. [00:21:17] That's a waste of money. [00:21:18] Right. [00:21:19] I understand. [00:21:20] So that would fix that, and that would leave that option open to the council by resolution on an annual basis. [00:21:25] I would second the motion. [00:21:27] Can we just, for the record, just open it up to the public, even though there's nobody here? [00:21:32] We can cover that. [00:21:35] Anybody in the public who would like to come out and speak? [00:21:40] I see nothing bringing back. [00:21:41] That's about all I have to say. [00:21:45] I just want to say that we're addressing one particular thing here. [00:21:50] We're not addressing the water. [00:21:52] We're not addressing, you know, the refuge pickup. [00:21:56] We're addressing, you know, picking up people's houses and how we're going to deal with that. [00:22:00] So I'd like to stay on topic that way just as a comment there. [00:22:04] The other thing is that I know that if I was borderline staying with this particular landlord, [00:22:13] that probably for the last three months I wouldn't pay my trash bill. [00:22:17] You know, it's only, let's exaggerate and say $15. [00:22:21] So I'd walk away from the $45. [00:22:24] So the landlord, I want the landlord to be responsible for his tenants. [00:22:30] If we're going to provide that trash pickup, you know, I want that available. [00:22:36] That's why I say he can pass $15 a month on to his tenant the next time he signs a lease. [00:22:44] So I still think that the amount of money that we've lost, [00:22:48] I see the amount of commercial businesses that people walk out every night with their trash [00:22:52] and put it wherever they put it, in their car, in their neighbor's dumpster, whatever. [00:22:58] And so I have a problem with, I think it just becomes a lot more manageable, a lot more honesty. [00:23:08] And I think that that's, you know, we're not talking but $130 to $150 a month. [00:23:21] So, I mean, I kind of agree with both of you. [00:23:24] If you have renters that aren't paying, somebody's got to be responsible [00:23:27] and we have to make the owners responsible. [00:23:28] That's definitely the way to go because we do have renters who don't pay. [00:23:32] We do have, and we're losing that money. [00:23:34] We also have owners who share trash. [00:23:37] They put it in each other sometimes. [00:23:39] Sometimes it gets picked up. [00:23:40] Sometimes it doesn't. [00:23:41] You know, by making them responsible, I think that's the way to go. [00:23:44] We have to make them responsible. [00:23:45] But I do like having the option in the ordinance to be able to change it if we needed to. [00:23:50] And with the change that Councilman Peters, or Altman, sorry, is suggesting, you'll still have that option. [00:23:58] So you can all do exactly what you're saying down the road at any time. [00:24:03] So that one will not affect anything if you make the change that Councilman Altman is requesting. [00:24:09] So I'll make a motion to approve that with that change. [00:24:14] Second. [00:24:16] All those in favor? [00:24:17] Aye. [00:24:18] Aye. [00:24:21] 3-0. [00:24:22] Yep, 3-0. [00:24:23] Thanks.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

4. 5Communications▶ 24:27
5. 6Adjournment▶ 24:36
6. 3

   Moment of Silence

   Moment of Silence.