San Bernardino council adopts franchise amendment, raises maximum permitted solid‑waste rates

San Bernardino — The San Bernardino City Council adopted a third amendment to the city—s solid‑waste franchise agreement at its July 2, 2025, meeting and approved an increase to the maximum permitted residential collection rates following a public hearing and public comment period.

City staff told the council the amendment updates the franchise agreement the city entered into on Jan. 19, 2016, and reflects previous modifications, including two amendments approved Jan. 25, 2016, and a July 2024 amendment and a March 31, 2024 extension. The staff presentation said the franchise holder (referred to in the record variously as "Burtech/Bartech/Vertech") provides collection for multifamily properties and commercial containers and makes annual payments and infrastructure contributions to the city under the contract.

The hearing was held under the requirements of Proposition 218 and the city—s protest procedures, staff said. Staff reported that 13 written protests were submitted to the hearing record but that the written protests did not constitute a majority by parcel; after staff—s review the city concluded a majority protest did not exist and the council proceeded to adopt the third amendment and the rate adjustments after public comment. No roll‑call vote tally was given in the spoken record.

Why it matters

The change affects monthly maximum rates charged under the franchise and the way the CPI‑based annual adjustments in the contract are applied. The presentation said the franchise allows the contractor to seek CPI increases up to 5 percent annually; amounts above or below that level are treated under the franchise provisions and may be carried forward year to year. Staff provided example monthly figures during the presentation showing a change from about $26.42 to $27.11 in the illustrative service tier and noted rounding differences could add about $0.63 to some tiers if certain additional percentages were approved.

What staff told the council

City staff summarized contract provisions and the components of Burtech—s payments: staff said the franchise includes annual payments and specific amounts for franchise fees and infrastructure/maintenance contributions (staff cited annual franchise payments and line items in the contract; amounts were presented in the staff report). Staff also explained the city is implementing a state‑mandated recycling service change (described in the staff report as a state requirement; staff did not cite a specific statute in the public record) and that implementing that mandate contributed to proposed cost adjustments. Staff described the CPI base used for annual adjustments and said the contractor submitted a proposal for an increase that staff reviewed and found to average about 2.69–2.8 percent for the cited period; at one point staff reported a per‑household proposal of $2.76, representing a 5 percent cap in a sample calculation.

Public comment and council questions

Residents and community members spoke broadly during the public comment period. Common concerns included the impact of higher monthly fees on seniors and low‑income households, billing and discount procedures for mobile‑home residents, the timing and clarity of mailed notices, the cost and pace of implementing state‑mandated recycling and container color changes, and requests for more multilingual outreach. Several speakers asked whether senior discounts are available and how to apply; staff said a 10 percent senior discount has been available and that the city offers application assistance by phone for those who cannot apply online.

Several speakers asked about container placement and whether complexes would receive separate color‑coded containers for recycling, organics and trash. City and franchise representatives said some commercial locations face permitting or placement challenges but that delivery of multiple containers is part of compliance with the state mandate and that the city and franchise will work with property owners on implementation.

Council discussion and outcome

Councilmembers asked staff clarifying questions about the senior discount, how mobile‑home accounts are billed, and the scope of the state mandate the city is implementing. After hearing staff and public comment, the council proceeded with a resolution to adopt the third amendment to the franchise agreement and to adjust the maximum permitted rates as presented in the staff report. Staff recorded that a majority protest (per Proposition 218 procedure by parcel) did not exist; the council adopted the resolution and rate adjustments at the conclusion of the public hearing. The spoken record did not include a recorded mover/second or a roll‑call vote tally.

What remains unresolved

Residents asked for additional outreach and more time to submit written protests; staff said the 45‑day mailed notice period is the statutory process for Proposition 218 hearings and that written protests must be received before the hearing closed to be counted. Multiple speakers urged expanded bilingual notices and more direct outreach to mobile‑home parks and senior households. The council did not place further direction on the record to reopen or extend the protest period.