Regional agency members direct creation of ad hoc committee to negotiate solid-waste franchise

Regional agency representatives directed staff to form an ad hoc committee of one elected official and one staff representative from each jurisdiction to help negotiate an upcoming solid-waste franchise agreement, saying the region needs subject-matter expertise to protect ratepayers.

One board member (S1) told colleagues that negotiations “can go so badly without a subject-matter expert and real negotiation skills,” and said the panel should include someone — a CEO, outside counsel expert, or a consultant already working with integrated waste — who can focus on long-term rate impacts tied to landfill or transfer-station decisions.

A staff member (S2) confirmed the request was timely: “The RFP has already gone out. I believe it was posted last Friday,” and said the procurement was structured to solicit the project as part of the bidding process. S2 added that franchise agreements typically come up only every 10 to 20 years, so the regional members should prioritize solid-waste expertise during negotiations.

Board members and small-city representatives asked that the ad hoc allow both elected officials and city staff to serve and that smaller jurisdictions be supported with consultant help if needed. “We don't have the million resources that we need,” one board member (S3) said, urging inclusion of city managers or a consultant so small cities like San Juan Bautista can participate effectively.

The meeting facilitator (S4) proposed a structure in which each agency names a primary and an alternate representative — either an elected official or staff — so at least one representative attends each ad hoc meeting. Staff also recapped prior practice: the Recology franchise negotiations had involved integrated-waste staff, city managers and a consultant (CSG Consulting), rather than the LTF serving as the review committee.

A board member (S5) moved to “assign a staff person and elected official from each jurisdiction to the ad hoc committee for negotiations.” The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. Staff said they would present implementation details and the full recommendation again at a future meeting for formal designation by each jurisdiction.

Before adjourning, members asked staff to check alternate dates for the next LTF meeting because it currently falls on Election Day. Staff recommended contacting jurisdictions individually to confirm chamber availability. The meeting then recessed after members moved and seconded to adjourn.