Waste Management vs. the Canyonlands

Local Control
16

Waste ManagementAt the June 16th Castro Valley Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) General Purpose Meeting, a crowd of 75 irate residents gathered to complain about a large and unexpected rate increase by Waste Management (WM) for garbage collection in rural Castro Valley.

The new rates will affect 260 residents of the “Canyonlands” areas in the rural canyon areas on the eastern side of Castro Valley, and reflect up to a 300% increase on the current rates that have been in place since 2011. The area is outside of the jurisdiction of the Castro Valley Sanitary District (CVSan), and therefore does not fall under CVSan’s contract with Waste Management. The residents are in a “free market” area, where they can contract with whomever they like for garbage collection. Currently WM is the only company servicing the area, giving them a virtual monopoly on services.

Map of Canyonland
The bold lines show the streets affected by the WM decision.

A representative from Waste Management was on hand to explain the company’s rationale behind the sudden increase. In the past few years, many residents had requested recycling services in addition to their trash pickups. While WM was researching the requests in order to determine potential costs, they discovered that the company had failed to update the rates since 2011. Furthermore, their internal auditors calculated that the rates in force were “underpriced” and had probably been incorrect in the first place. WM decided to revise the prices and implement a corrected and current pricing structure immediately. Unfortunately, this amounted to an instant increase in rates which for many residents approached a 300% jump. The WM representative told the MAC that they decided to just “pull the trigger” and “correct the price coding all at once.”

The residents still will not have recycling services.

Many residents were on hand at the meeting to question the move, and complain about the lack of notice. WM sent out a notice that the increase would be coming, but many did not receive it. Their only “notice” was when they opened their regular bill to discover the new rate. WM could not explain why the notices were not all be delivered but the bills did manage to get through, since they both used the same database for the addresses.

The MAC chair Marc Crawford voiced concern that this decision was made quickly and quietly. He questioned why the residents were being forced to pay all at once for a problem that only occurred due to internal errors at WM, and only came to light because the residents wanted to recycle. The MAC urged residents to contact WM and complain about the increase, and request a scaled implementation over a period of time. They even went so far as to post the email address to WM’s Regional VP on the whiteboard for all to see.

Crawford also said that Supervisor Miley specifically wanted this topic to be brought up at a MAC meeting for public scrutiny and comment. He acknowledged that the MAC and the Supervisor’s office really had no power to affect this decision, but they both felt it needed to be publicized and commented upon.

Both the MAC and County Staff agreed that the best solution for the Canyonlands would be for them to be annexed by CVSan, thus giving them elected representation and greater bargaining powers over WM. A proposal for this has been in review since 2009, but has been stalled on both sides for the past year. The main sticking point is funding. CVSan requires a formal survey of the annexed area, and they predict it will run between $40,000 and $50,000.

The meeting ended with the MAC:

  • Encouraging WM to consider a “scaling up” of the rate increase
  • Asking the County and CVSan to explore creative ways to finance the annexation, or possibly even waive the survey requirement
  • Telling concerned residents to make themselves heard to the management of WM

In the week since the MAC meeting, there have been unconfirmed reports that WM will scale in the price increases over a three year period due to public outcry. Hopefully we will learn more at future MAC meetings. It seems that this story has turned out to be a great example of Supervisor Miley and the MAC teaming up to help residents who had no say of their own.

Thanks for the report on the ongoing Waste Management and the Canyonlands story! While I missed the meeting I had several neighbors who were able to attend. It sounds like their voices may have been heard.

They have all of us over a barrel , they can charge us anything they want , they is known other company. in the area to take care of us. . they gave us different phone no. to call. none would service us.

Thanks for the report. We did get the notice dated 1 May.

We did pay $18 per 30 gal trash can per month, with 2 cans for the two houses here.
The new price is $50. A hefty increase per 32-gal.

BUT new rates are $49.57 for 64-gal and $53.38 for 96-gal. carts.

So by switching to a single 64 the bill goes from 36/month to 53.4 so “only” a 50% increase.
We sometimes have overflow or save large things for a trip to the dump,
so we ordered a 96-gal at about the same price and will be able to reduce the number of dump trips.
Possibly a net saving over a year given gas and dump prices.
We may even fill extra space with heavy things we presently recycle
with no reimbursement (magazines etc.).

I ordered the change in end of May.
New 96-gal cart has still not arrived after 3 emails and 3 phone calls.
Not a particularly well run business.

Nate Miley once again has let the people of the Canyonlands down. First it was the waterline down Crow Canyon Road! Now no garbage service! You see, the result of this meeting is that waste management is cancelling all garbage service as of December 31st. We just received the letter.

Hi Monique,
Residents of the canyon lands requested recycling and the County began working on this several years ago with the Castro Valley Sanitary District (CVSAN). CVSAN and Alameda County have proposed annexation of the Canyon lands to the CVSAN District. During this process Waste Management evaluated that proposal and apparently realized that they were losing money servicing that area.

Waste Management, a for-profit company, decided that they would raise the garbage pickup rates so they would become profitable. Residents became outraged at the rate increase and demanded something be done. The issue was brought to the attention of the Castro Valley MAC and canyon residents wanted the rate increase rolled back. Waste Management did roll it back the rates some but also decided that it would not be profitable to continue garbage pickup and will cancel service to those folks who are not in the Castro Valley Sanitary District as of January 1, 2015.

The County and the CVSAN are pursuing annexation of the canyon lands into the Castro Valley Sanitary District. This all has to be approved by the State and the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).

The Southern Loop Pipeline that you referred to was a done deal with EBMUD before Nate Miley was elected Supervisor. When Supervisor Miley took office we came up with an alternative pipeline plan but EBMUD would not discuss it. I know this to be true because I am the person who worked on it.

Bob Swanson
Castro Valley Resident
Supervisor Nate Miley’s office
510-670-5718

Bob, thanks for the post and info. First ,what is the “alternative pipeline plan” and why will EBMUD not discuss it? Secondly do you or does anyone have any updates on our garbage service? I attended last night’s ( 9/8/14) MAC meeting but it was not discussed probably because it was not on the agenda.

Thanks,

Jason Ricketts
Castro Valley resident

About 13 years ago EBMUD installed the Southern Loop Pipeline an emergency pipeline in case the current pipeline was broken by earthquake. It was routed down Crow Canyon Road.

When Supervisor miley took office he ask me to find an alternative. I found that a notch could be cut in the in the large trench that could have carried a much smaller pipe that would have provided enough water to the current crow canyon residents without encouraging growth. I found a state agency who would have paid for the cost of the installation of the small pipe. Residents would have made monthly payments for a period of years to repay the cost of the pipeline. EBMUD had already concluded their planning and was not receptive to an alternative plan.

The County and CVSAN are working to annex the area into the CVSAN District. This is very complicated legally and will take time to work it out.
Bob Swanson

I believe that most of the residents in the Canyonlands don’t want to have mandated trash pickup, they do not want to be forced into a franchise agreement, and they do not want to be subsidized by the people within the Castro Valley Sanitary District. Did anyone ask the residents of the Castro Valley Sanitary District if they would like to see yet another rate hike so that a few outlying houses could have trash pickup?

Seriously if you can afford to live in the Canyonlands then you can afford to pay for your own trash pickup and you don’t need to be subsidized by the residents of Castro Valley.

This is yet another example of a government agency, Castro Valley Sanitary District, trying to grow its empire. I think it is time that the Castro Valley Sanitary District Board is dissolved and their sphere of influence annexed into the Oro Loma Sanitary District.

I also think it is time Bob Swanson and Nate Miley did thier job. If they are worried about the Canyonlands maybe they should deal with the speeding, reckless driving, and illegal dumping that is taking place in the Canyonlands.

Dear cl dreek whoever you are,
The very reason the County and Castro Valley Sanitary District is sending out surveys is to determine if folks want garbage pickup. We call it democratic process.

Castro Valley Sanitary District is engaged because your neighbors in the canyon have asked them to help. I believe that CVSAN is satisfied with their existing empire.

There are services available to you:
When you are having speeding and reckless driving problems contact the CHP at:
Address: 21020 Redwood Rd, Castro Valley, CA 94546, Phone:(510) 581-9028.
For CHP Traffic Complaint form:
http://www.chp.ca.gov/offices/ggoffices/Castro_Valley/375_traffic_complaint.html

To report illegal dumping online: http://www.acgov.org/pwa/requests/
OR You can use the Mobile Citizen APP
Report issues such as potholes, graffiti, illegal dumping and other requests for services by simply taking a photo and submitting it directly to the Public Works Agency.
http://www.acgov.org/mobile/apps/
OR email or phone Mike Dutra at Public Works: miked@acpwa.org – (510) 670-5528

Thanks you for your comment.
Bob Swanson

Thank you for the information.

While ACPWA is very responsive, the illegal dumping is a continuous problem that is not being addressed by the county (except they do a great job of picking up the trash that people dump). Thank you Mr. Dutra and everyone else at ACPWA for the great job you are doing throughout the County!

The people at the highway patrol office are really nice, but nothing really changes and officers are rarely seen patrolling.

As you guessed… I do live in the Canyonlands. I have received nothing from CVSAN concerning the trash pickup issues; neither have most of my neighbors. I heard about it at a public meeting in the middle of September on a different topic. There were several people from the Canyonlands and Castro Valley at this meeting that learned about it for the first time.

For your information what I said about the empire is true; if it wasn’t they would have listened to LAFCO and followed LAFCO’s recommendation to combine CVSAN and OLSD. They have not done so because they don’t want to give up their empire (CVSD or OLSD). Maybe you should read up on the history before you attempt to rebut my comments. I challenge you to read up on it and report back to this forum how many times LAFCO has reviewed CVSAN and OLSD and recommended combining CVSAN into OLSD and what CVSAN’s and OLSD’s responses were.

The people in Castro Valley need to understand that their rates will go up to subsidize the rates in the Canyonlands. This needs to be made clear to the Castro Valley residents. The democratic process we follow is called representative democracy; but you can’t call it that if the representatives do not communicate or they hold back the truth from those they represent. Y’all aren’t communicating the true impact; your plan is to annex the Canyonlands into CVSAN through LAFCO and the CVSAN Board of Directors without telling the people of Castro Valley the whole truth. Without truthful communication a representative democracy is not a democracy.

Do you really expect Waste Management to lower the rates for the Canyonlands just because it becomes part of CVSAN’S franchise? They are going to have to spread the cost over the rest of the franchise. I believe that the franchise agreement would be forced open for negotiation once the annexation process is complete (most if not all contracts have clauses for re-negotiation in the event of changes). The residents won’t know about the true cost until after the annexation takes place. Waste Management will be happy to renegotiate rates with CVSAN; it will give them an oprotunity to make more money.

This whole thing sounds like the political process of “its easier to ask for forgiveness then permission.”

Hi cl,
Dumping is a continuous process. If the county knew the answer, the problem would be solved. Public Works has tried some cameras. People dump anywhere at anytime and since Public works is not omnipresent it is difficult to know. If you have some ideas on how to solve the problem let me know. Keep in mind funding is always a problem.

My theory is if everyone has garbage service there may be less dumping.

CHP (581-9028) is limited in their ability to be everywhere at once, so they rely on folks such as yourself to keep them informed of traffic trends.

There has been one public meeting at the MAC so far and more will come over the coming months. It is likely that CVSAN will have some public meetings also.

I will take your word for LAFCO, CVSAN, OLSD issues. I have lived in both Sanitary Districts and my personal preference is so far CVSAN.
Bob Swanson

Sounds like the “One Bay Area” scam is starting by cutting off services to rural areas so it makes living the lifestyle we prefer as uncomfortable as possible.

Here is the latest from Alameda County Planning Department. They have identified about 559 Canyonland parcels that have frontage on a county road and are outside of the CVSan boundary. Based on the Assessor’s use codes, around 273 parcels of the 559 appear to have some type of residential or commercial development on them. There may be some inaccuracies in the use codes, but we should be in the ballpark. Assuming that only parcels with road frontage and some form of development on them would require garbage service, it looks like the total number of potential customers in the Canyonlands is not much greater than the number of accounts Waste Management has been serving. We’ve shared this information with CVSan staff. They’re in the process of preparing a survey of Canyonland property owners to determine their interest in annexing to the district.
Bob Swanson

CVSan is very involved in helping the County find a solution. I think it will turn out to be a good thing that Waste Management withdrew their offer. This issue is getting a lot more attention and urgency now.

This is a map of the location of Castro Valley Lumber
Community
6
Chick-fil-A next to Burger Island? Where’s the beef?

When you consider how this location is a gateway to this community, how poorly conceived this intersection is, and the increasing traffic along 580, it is fair to question the wisdom of placing a new drive-thru restaurant here.

Governance
Reform Castro Valley’s MAC

The leadership of any community is central to the health and vibrancy of that community.

Featured Story
1
Eden Area MAC survey results to be revealed Wednesday, Castro Valley allies needed

As of September 8, the surveys that asked residents of Ashland, Cherryland, Hayward Acres and San Lorenzo whether there is a need for a Municipal Advisory Council (MAC), among other county related inquiries, have been counted, tallied and recorded by the Alameda County Community Development Agency. The survey results are scheduled …