The Merced County Board of Supervisors on July 22 postponed consideration of a proposal to terminate existing solid-waste franchise agreements after waste haulers told the board early termination would shift large costs to residents and employees.

Hauler representatives said contracts renegotiated recently anticipated a long rollout to meet state recycling and organics requirements under SB 1383 and that terminating or shortening terms would accelerate depreciation of vehicles and carts and could raise rates.

“WM has already invested millions of dollars into this partnership,” Vanessa Barberis, a Waste Management representative, told the board. “If a termination notice is issued now, we will still be carrying 40% of that investment, costs that were meant to be recovered over a 10 year period. Accelerating that depreciation to a 5 year timeline could create additional cost pressures, which may result in higher rates for residents in the years ahead.”

Savannah Jilton of Jilton Solid Waste said her company similarly made equipment purchases and staffing decisions based on a long-term amortization schedule and asked the county to date any termination to coincide with a 10‑year amortization so haulers could recover those costs.

Supervisor Benjamin Silvera made the motion to postpone the matter to the board’s second August meeting; Supervisor Darren McDaniel seconded and the board voted unanimously to delay the item. The board also agreed to consider item 19 separately from the other public‑works consent items.

During public comment and board discussion, supervisors pressed haulers for details about the SB 1383 rollout and whether residents in automatic waiver zones had been incorrectly placed on delivery lists or billed. Barberis said staff corrected the accounts they were aware of and that WM would work with county GIS to double‑check affected addresses. “Everything that’s been brought to our attention has been corrected,” she said.

Supervisors also asked staff to gather additional information before final action. Supervisor Silvera said he supported postponement to allow time for more research; Supervisor Pereira pressed haulers and staff to ensure that low‑income residents and those in waiver zones are not incorrectly charged. Supervisor McDaniel said staying ahead of maintenance and vegetation issues in waterways is important but distinct from the contract question.

No formal termination or contract change occurred at the meeting; the board’s recorded action was to postpone item 19 to the second meeting in August for further information and deliberation.

The board did not set a new effective date for contract termination at the July 22 session; haulers asked that any termination notice be future‑dated no sooner than July 2030 if the board proceeds, to allow cost recovery over the expected depreciation schedule.

Public records associated with the agenda identify the policy driver for the county’s service and equipment upgrades as California Senate Bill 1383, the state law that requires local jurisdictions to reduce organic waste and expand collection programs. The county and haulers referenced an existing evergreen clause in the contracts that allowed them to continue until terminated with five years’ notice but said negotiations originally had contemplated longer amortization to cover equipment purchases.

The board instructed staff to return with additional information at the next scheduled meeting and directed county staff and haulers to coordinate on address verification for automatic waiver zones and on customer‑service training.

Provenance: Evidence for this article appears in public comment and board discussion on item 19 beginning with Vanessa Barberis of Waste Management (public comment starting at timestamp 1570.995) through the board’s vote to postpone (recorded motion and vote concluding at timestamps near 2446.755–2455.8699).