Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solid waste report: Jacksonville tracks revenues, eyes Sunoco contract renewal and rate model
Summary
City staff reported year-to-date solid waste revenues of $6 million and recommended evaluating the fee schedule and creating a solid-waste rate model; staff also asked council to finalize a new recycling contract with the MRF operator (Sunoco) and noted commodity-price volatility affects net processing costs.
City staff presented the annual solid waste report at a Jacksonville workshop, reporting year-to-date revenues of $6,000,000 with a full-year estimate of $10,000,000 and year-to-date expenditures of $7,000,000 (full-year estimate $9.9 million).
"We've collected, year to date, $6,000,000 in revenues, and our full year estimate is $10,000,000," the presenter said, and noted capital outlay (for dumpsters and trucks) is often front-loaded early in the fiscal year. The presenter emphasized the city's three-year plan to move residential monthly charges toward $30 and said the city remains generally "on track" with that plan but needs to continue monitoring revenues and expenditures before recommending further rate increases.
On recycling, staff described the city's contract with the materials recovery facility (MRF) operator and explained the city pays a processing fee that is reduced by a credit for the weighted-average commodity price. Staff provided examples from FY25: a contract fee of about $110 per ton offset by a commodity credit (example cited $47) produced a net billed rate in one month of about $62/ton; commodity values have fluctuated from highs near $64/ton to lows near $26/ton in recent months.
Staff said the existing Sunoco contract (entered in 2021) is expiring and presented proposed terms that would hold a $115/ton processing fee through FY27 with modest increases in later years, while retaining the credit for the weighted-average commodity price and the operator's right to reject contaminated loads. Staff asked the council to include contract authorization on a future agenda and said the manager could be authorized to sign the agreement if council chooses.
The presenter recommended further work on the solid waste fee schedule (which staff described as complicated) and development of a formal rate model similar to the city's water and sewer rate model, to be completed for future budget cycles.
Council members asked about possible county tipping-fee increases and the city's appliance/metal recycling arrangements; staff said the county was evaluating tipping fees but no official changes had been communicated and that metals/appliances are taken to a local recycler and residents are not currently charged for metal pickup though the fee schedule allows charges if needed.
Staff did not present a formal motion to change rates at the workshop; staff said any rate changes or contract approvals would be returned to council for final action.
