Hanford refuse division warns tipping‑fee and compliance pressures; council accepts presentation

Public Works Director Russell (Russ) Sterling told the City Council that Hanford’s refuse fund is under pressure from multiple directions and that staff will likely recommend a Prop 218 process (a voter‑approval rate process) if the shortfall cannot be mitigated by other means.

Why it matters: refuse service is an enterprise fund that must be self‑supported; higher disposal fees, state mandates and truck replacements can require residential and commercial rate adjustments that would affect every utility customer.

What staff reported: - Tipping‑fee increases: staff reported that regional tipping fees have increased (presentation noted a progression from about $58 to about $65–$70 per ton), producing an unbudgeted cost pressure (KRWA/RWA adjustments were cited by staff). Sterling said the recent fee increases equate to roughly $250,000 additional disposal cost not budgeted for the refuse fund. - Homeless‑related costs: downtown enclosures are subject to trash‑sorting and vandalism; staff estimated downtown enclosure cleanup costs at about $10,000–$15,000 per year and described damage to lids, chains and locks that add maintenance expense. - State recycling mandates: staff described compliance with AB 341 and Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383) requiring organics and targeted recycling streams and that the city is generally in compliance but at increased cost; the city now operates a three‑bin system for residential and commercial accounts, which raises container and operational costs. - Fleet and equipment: staff said many refuse trucks are aged and expensive to repair; a fleet review identified about 14 heavy trucks potentially needing replacement over the next five years. Staff noted that electric heavy‑duty refuse trucks suitable for full routes are limited, expensive, and currently do not meet all operational needs; a sample electric front‑loader observed by staff had a price above $1 million and did not finish a full route on a single charge. - Technology and operational improvements: staff proposed scale systems in trucks, route‑management software to track missed service and weight, and better fleet and break‑room facilities for staff. The presentation highlighted that route optimization and in‑cab software could reduce overtime and missed stops and improve accountability.

Council action: a council member moved to accept the presentation and the council approved that motion by a 5–0 vote. No Prop 218 vote was held at this meeting; council accepted the staff presentation and asked staff to include refuse funding in upcoming budget analyses.

Ending: staff will return to the budget process with more detailed options; Sterling and staff urged the council to consider whether to pursue a Prop 218 rate study if the fund shortfall persists.