Kalb Responsive Records Batch 3 PDF

From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Sherman, Steve
Farmer, Casey
Bolotina, Olga
Civicorps, July 22 Public Works Committee
Friday, July 18, 2014 11:41:01 AM
Hi CaseyFYI, here are the themes I see for Civicorps:
Not only local jobs, but also:
High social value

Lower cost
Higher diversion
Uses EBMUD
Underscored by greater accountability and transparency.
Steven Sherman
Business Development
EBMUD Resource Recovery
Tel. : 510-287-0818 direct
Email: ssherman@ebmud.com
Web: www.ebmud.com/truckedwaste
Developing renewable energy, protecting the environment

From: Farmer, Casey [mailto:CFarmer@oaklandnet.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 5:46 PM
To: Sherman, Steve
Subject: RE: Checking In re: Oakland Zero Waste Info
Thanks Steve. Were looking forward to hearing staffs response to Civicorps next week.
Best,
Casey
From: Sherman, Steve [mailto:ssherman@ebmud.com]

To: Farmer, Casey
Subject: FW: Checking In re: Oakland Zero Waste Info
Hi CaseyWe appreciate your work and efforts!
I have read through Civicorps proposal closely, and also have dubbed out on one handwritten sheet
of paper various specific options that I believe the Council has, but may not be fully aware that it
has, in terms of awarding contracts and making contract stipulations.
Civicorps is proposing a lower cost of service with high social value, and EBMUD benefits as well. If
you have time to meet for coffee or at your office, I think I can explain the significant cost
differential between Civicorps/EBMUD and WM/WM collection and processing, based on my prior
industry knowledge and analysis of published corporate financial statements. I can also walk you
through the options I see.
Personal opinion not endorsed by my employer: In these arrangements worth approximately $1

billion over 10 years, with estimated profits of approximately $100 million being transferred from
Oakland ratepayers to corporate shareholders in New York, Texas, the Cayman Islands, and other
places far from Oakland, surely our local elected officials can stipulate that more needs to stay in
Oakland for Oakland.
Please let me know if youd like to meet,
Steven Sherman
Tel. : 510-287-0818 direct
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Harris, Monica
"jvanstaveren@sonic.net"
Dan Kalb"s Newsletter + Legislative Calendar
Monday, August 03, 2015 6:20:00 PM
Newsletter - May 2015 - FINAL.pdf
Hello,
I spoke with you the other day re: Dans stance on the Zero Waste issue. Please read about how Dan
intended on rates only going up slightly and how the negotiations played out (I think I mentioned
that its being reviewed by the City Administrators office and that Council has addressed WM about
renegotiations but no changes have been made yet.)
Also, please use this link to check for when future Council meetings will be scheduled regarding
Waste Management: https://oakland.legistar.com/calendar.aspx
Council is in recess this month so, I would check back later in the month for something hopefully by
early Sept.
Sorry that I havent had a chance to send this sooner.
Thanks for your patience,
Monica Harris
Community Liaison
District 1, Councilman Dan Kalb
City Council | City of Oakland
1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza Ste. 234 | Oakland, CA 94612
510-238-7014
Click this link to subscribe to Council Member Kalb's newsletter.
Status of EBMUD-WMAC Subcontract Negotiations - April 20, 2015
Background Negotiations are Underway

The Mixed Materials and Organics (MMO) Agreement between Waste Management of Alameda
County (WMAC) and the City of Oakland (City), requires WMAC to enter into an agreement with East
Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) for processing of commercial organic materials into renewable
energy at the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). WMAC and EBMUD are negotiating this
subcontract, and City staff has the role of reviewing and approving the subcontract.
EBMUD is on Track for Temporary Processing
Due to delays in the Citys award and contracting schedule, EBMUD cannot be ready to accept
commercial organic materials at the WWTP on July 1, 2015. The MMO anticipated this and allows
EBMUD to arrange for alternative temporary organics processing from July 1, 2015 through July 1,
2016. EBMUD has been in discussions with transfer facility operators in Berkeley, San Leandro and
Richmond, who would accept the material and deliver it to compost facilities for processing. EBMUD
fully expects to have plans in place with these operators well in advance of July 1, 2015 to ensure that
the material will be appropriately handled.
EBMUD has Several Concerns with the WMAC Draft Subcontract
EBMUD and WMAC are continuing to negotiate a subcontract. EBMUD hopes that City staff will assist
in resolving several important issues on which WMAC and EBMUD appear to have differing positions.
Resolution of these issues is critical to EBMUDs ability to perform.
EBMUD should have its choice of disposal facilities. EBMUDs operation will remove
contamination from the material and while a good portion will be diverted for recycling, some
will need to be disposed of as residue at a landfill. WMAC contends that the residue
contractually must be hauled by them and disposed of at their landfill facility. EBMUD
(supported by City staff) disputes that the MMO gives WMAC this exclusive right. Disposal at
the Altamont facility would result in significant cost increases for EBMUD and create a
disincentive for WMAC to control contamination in the food scraps because residual waste
would be mandated to go to their landfill.
EBMUD should have the opportunity to review the scope of material it will receive. WMAC and
EBMUD agree that the material to be processed by EBMUD consists of food scraps, which is a
subset of commercial organics. EBMUD is requesting a process by which the District would
have the opportunity to review determinations made by WMAC as to which commercial
organics customers are to be routed to EBMUD and which are not. WMAC has not agreed to this
request.
\\w-fp-ww-1.win.ebmud\data\DATA\NAB\ESD\R2\Reference Library\Waste\0 To Sort\Food\GOVTS\OAK\Zero Waste RFP\EBMUD Fact

Sheet on Food Waste_4-20-15_final.docx
Status of EBMUD-WMAC Subcontract Negotiations - April 20, 2015
Per the MMO, WMAC has the option to preprocess food scraps prior to delivery to EBMUD on
days that the material collected exceeds 50 tons. This preprocessing option presents two issues:
o The subcontract should specify allowable levels of contaminants in preprocessed
material. Preprocessing of food scraps consists of contaminant removal and size
reduction to produce a clean feedstock suitable for digestion. EBMUD cannot accept
ground material for digestion that has high levels of glass, metal and plastic. EBMUD
and WMAC are currently negotiating preprocessing specifications, which must specify
allowable levels of contaminants.
o WMAC shouldnt be able to cherry-pick the cleanest material to preprocess. Without
any controls, WMAC would have business incentives to select the cleanest material to
preprocess itself, leaving the dirtiest material for EBMUDs preprocessing operation.
Since the economics of EBMUDs preprocessing project are based on an average level of
contamination, the additional costs presented by receiving disproportionally
contaminated material will impact the projects financials.
The subcontract should not set an arbitrary distance limit for temporary facilities. WMACs draft
subcontract requires that any temporary facility must not be more than 15 air miles from
EBMUDs facility. This would limit EBMUDs options for temporary facilities and increase risk
to all parties. EBMUD requests that the City relieve WMAC of the requirement for this provision
to be in the subcontract. The City already has the authority to approve each temporary facility on
a case by case basis. Rather than defining a distance upfront that precludes potential facilities,
distance can be considered as part of the Citys approval process.
Clarification is needed regarding EBMUDs obligations and rights to reject contaminated loads.
The MMO, and thus the subcontract, requires EBMUD to comply with commitments made in a
letter to Alameda County Waste Management Authority (ACWMA) dated June 13, 2014. In this
letter, at ACWMAs insistence, EBMUD committed to reject loads with greater than 10%
contamination. However, the MMO does not afford EBMUD the right to reject loads due to
contamination, therefore presenting an inherent conflict. EBMUD staff has only recently
identified this conflict, and we look forward to discussing potential solutions with the City,
WMAC, and ACWMA.
\\w-fp-ww-1.win.ebmud\data\DATA\NAB\ESD\R2\Reference Library\Waste\0 To Sort\Food\GOVTS\OAK\Zero Waste RFP\EBMUD Fact

Sheet on Food Waste_4-20-15_final.docx
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Young, Marguerite
Bolotina, Olga
EBMUD Fact Sheet on Food Waste_4-20-15_final.pdf
Tuesday, April 21, 2015 10:49:36 AM
EBMUD Fact Sheet on Food Waste_4-20-15_final.pdf
ATT00001.txt
Hi Olga
Thanks for taking the time. Here are a few questions that it would be great for Dan to ask tonight. I think this hits
the highlights.
Our goal here is to reduce the city's contribution to climate change. We are truly fortunate to have found a partner in
EBMUD who can provide anaerobic digestion without our needing to make capital investments in new facilities.
With that in mind I have several questions and concerns about the sub contract.
1. As I understand it, quality control is extremely important to making the anaerobic digestion process work. I want
to be sure that we have a level playing field and clear agreement btwn the parties on this issue.
What progress has been made on getting agreement on the source of food waste from the commercial organics
waste stream will go to EBMUD?
How will WM ensure that any pre-processed food waste that is delivered meets the quality specs that EBMUD
requires, instead of requiring additional pre-processing?
ACWMA requires EBMUD to reject loads that have more than 10% contaminants, how is this dealt with in the
subcontract.
2. I have learned that WM is insisting that material rejected from preprocessing at EBMUD's facility be disposed of
at Altamont, even though this would be much more expensive than options offered by EBMUD's preproccesors.
Where is WM getting this idea from. My recollection is that the city concurs with EBMUD that they should have
the right to dispose of the spoils as they choose.
3. Since EBMUD will need to use temporary facilities during the first year of the contract, what flexibility can the
City offer with regard to provisions for siting of such facilities...for instance can we retain case by case approval but
waive the 15 air mile limit?
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Kepke, Jacqueline
Wald, Zachary; Bolotina, Olga
Horenstein, Bennett; Chan, Gregory
EBMUD MMO Issue Table
Tuesday, February 10, 2015 11:38:25 AM
EBMUD MMO Issue Table_1-20-15.pdf
Zac and Olga,

Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today regarding EBMUDs concerns about the CityWaste Management MMO Agreement. Attached is the table we walked through. Please share as
needed. This was provided in January to Henry and Susan, who we understand also shared it with
WM. Please let us know if you have any questions or recommendations for us.
Thanks,
Jackie
Jackie Kepke, P.E. | Environmental Services Division Manager | East Bay Municipal Utility District | (510.287.1608 |
jkepke@ebmud.com
Summary of Key Outstanding EBMUD Organics Processing Contract Issues

January 20, 2015
Issue
EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms
Termination by
EBMUD
As a public agency, EBMUD cannot accept the

risks associated with signing this contract
without reasonable out clauses.
EBMUD needs the ability to terminate in
circumstances including the following:
- WM fails to pay
- EBMUD is unable to obtain permits
- Processing has the potential to cause
violations of permit or other legal
requirements
- Contamination levels cause unacceptable
process disruption
WM Position (based on
EBMUD understanding)
In the event EBMUD
provides notice of
termination, WM needs
sufficient time to get
alternate organics
processing facilities in place,
and a relaxation of the Citys
diversion requirements for
the material during that
time.
Request to City for Mixed Materials &

Organics (MMO) Franchise Agreement
The MMO should include language that
allows for a temporary relaxation of
diversion requirements for commercial
organics following EBMUD notice of
termination.
EBMUD proposes to provide reasonable notice

sufficient for WM to get alternative organics
processing facilities in place, and during that
interim, to divert the material to a Cityapproved facility at no additional cost to the
City or WM.
\\w-fp-ww-1.win.ebmud\data\DATA\NAB\ESD\R2\Reference Library\Waste\0 To Sort\Food\GOVTS\OAK\Zero Waste RFP\Waste Mgt, Inc\EBMUD MMO Issue Table_1-16-15_final (2).docx
Issue
Diversion
While EBMUD and its subcontractor will

endeavor to divert recyclable materials from
the undigestible waste delivered in organics
loads, we cannot assume liability for WM
meeting its overall diversion goals.
WM cannot be held to
standards based on EBMUD
performance. All material
sent to EBMUD should be
deemed diverted.

The MMO should be clear that liability
for compliance with the overall
diversion rate rests with WM, and any
EBMUD responsibility to meet
diversion goals passed through the
subcontract with EBMUD should be
limited to diversion associated with
material delivered to EBMUD. The City
and EBMUD should review the means
to establish a diversion rate for Food
Scraps processing via anaerobic
digestion.
Issue
Contamination
Contamination leads to additional preprocessing costs and degraded digestate

quality. Three parties WM, Civicorps, and
EBMUD have a role in managing
contamination, and EBMUD should not be
expected to bear full responsibility and cost
associated with it. The subcontract should,
therefore, lay out a process and accountability
for reducing contamination in loads delivered
to the District for processing.
The draft MMO does state that customers that
repeatedly are found to have greater than 10%
contamination in their organics bin can be
denied service, although that is discretionary to
the hauler. Most importantly, there is no
mechanism in the subcontract to link that tool
to the ability of EBMUD to reject loads that
contain excessive contamination or
Unacceptable Waste or to recover the
additional cost of dealing with additional
contamination.
WM cannot warrantee the
quality of material.

The MMO should define commercial
organics as not including more than
10% physical contamination and no
Unacceptable Waste.
The MMO should also include a
requirement that WM, using feedback
from EBMUD and Civicorps, enforce the
10% contamination threshold on
customers, and that WM expend a
defined amount of its public education
resources on outreach related to
commercial organics.
The MMO should exclude any loads
that are rejected by EBMUD due to
contamination from calculation of
EBMUDs performance on diversion
rate.
The MMO should also prohibit WM
from imposing any LD associated with
EBMUD rejecting a contaminated load.
Issue
Liquidated Damages
LDs should only be imposed on EBMUD to the

extent they are specific pass-throughs from the
MMO Agreement that is, they are clearly
outlined in the MMO and they are actually
imposed on WM by the City.
EBMUD needs to talk to the
City. LDs are a pass-through
from the MMO and they
have no ability to change
them.
LDs should not be assessed in the event that

EBMUD sends material to an Alternate
Processing Facility approved by the City under
the agreed circumstances.

The City should include language such
that LDs are not assessed against WM if
EBMUD diverts material to a Cityapproved Alternative Processing
Facility under pre-approved conditions.
The MMO should also prohibit WM
from imposing any LD associated with
EBMUD rejecting a contaminated load.
LDs should not be assessed on EBMUD if a load

is rejected because material is of poor quality
(see above).
Termination by WM
A meet and confer process and cure period

should be in place and invoked in the event
either the City or WM intends to assess LDs to
EBMUD in regards to EBMUDs performance.
EBMUD needs an opportunity to cure any
default prior to termination.
WM should not be allowed to terminate
unilaterally; City should approve any
termination.
WM has authority over

termination of its
subcontracts. (based on the
draft subcontract)
MMO should require that the City be

involved in any termination process
and ultimately approve termination of
the EBMUD subcontract.
Issue
Startup Schedule
EBMUD is in the process of procuring a

preprocessing subcontractor and expects to be
able to accept the Citys commercial Food
Scraps on or around July 1, 2016. During the
Start-up Period (July 2015 to ~July 2016),
EBMUD will take responsibility for diverting
Food Scraps to a City-approved Alternative
Processing Facility at no additional cost to the
City or WM. While EBMUD will endeavor to
have our facilities fully permitted and
operational as quickly as possible, there are
factors beyond our control that may impact the
schedule. We therefore are seeking flexibility
on the startup date, provided that we
demonstrate we are making significant
progress toward project startup.
EBMUDs approach is
acceptable to WM if it is
acceptable to the City.

The MMO may require EBMUD to
report on progress toward bringing our
operations online. However, the City,
not WM, should make the
determination as to whether EBMUD is
on track to start on a reasonable
timeline, and the City should provide
flexibility for reasonable variances from
the July 1, 2016 target date.
The MMO should also provide flexibility
on diversion rate during the Start-up
Period.
Issue
Indemnification
EBMUD believes the City should not be

required to incur losses to the extent they arise
from a legal challenge to the Subcontract, its
approval, or EBMUDs performance
thereunder. Therefore, EBMUD staff is willing
to recommend that the EBMUD Board accept
of the following obligations:
(1) to defend the City from any claim against
the City to void or set aside (a) the Subcontract,
(b) approvals of the Subcontract made by the
City or EBMUD, or (c) the subsequent
implementation of the Subcontract or the
approvals thereof, and
(2) to indemnify the City against losses the City
incurs to the extent such losses are incurred in
defense of or as a result of any claim within the
scope of EBMUDs defense obligation.
Performance Bond
The Citys proposed indemnity language is

largely consistent with these principles, but it
does not clearly limit EBMUDs defense and
indemnity obligations to claims and losses that
arise from the Subcontract and the approvals
and implementation thereof. For example, to
the extent a lawsuit against the City challenges
an aspect of the MMO franchise not related to
EBMUD or the Subcontract, the City (or WM)
should be responsible for the defense and any
associated liability.
As a public agency, EBMUD should not be
expected to have a performance bond. We
have sufficient liquid assets to satisfy any
To be negotiated between
EBMUD and the City.

EBMUD will provide a markup to the
Citys outside counsel on Tuesday and
would appreciate the opportunity to
work with the City Attorneys office to
reach agreement.
Requirement is a passthrough from the MMO.
MMO should state that the

performance bond requirement does
not apply to EBMUD.
Issue
Labor Requirements
Flow Control

obligations incurred under this agreement.
EBMUD needs to review the MMO and Term of
Resumption Service Plan to ensure their
requirements are not in direct conflict with any
EBMUD labor requirements.
Guarantee of materials flow is fundamental to
making prudent investment decisions.
Therefore, the MMO should explicitly designate
EBMUD as the Organics Materials Processing
Facility for Food Scraps, consistent with the
adopted ordinance. This designation should be
throughout the term of the franchise, including
extensions, if any.

Requirements are passed

through from the MMO.
EBMUD exclusion from
these requirements is
acceptable to WM if
acceptable to the City.
Not discussed.
MMO should state that Labor

requirements do not apply to EBMUD
but only to EBMUD subcontractors.
Include language that explicitly

designates EBMUD as the Organic
Materials Processing Facility for
commercial Food Scraps throughout
the term of the franchise, including
extensions, if any.
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Chan, Gregory
Ada Chan (adachan510@gmail.com); Chan, Ada; Bolotina, Olga; Wald, Zachary
Chan, Gregory
EBMUD"s edits for the zero waste resolution
Monday, September 22, 2014 11:17:12 AM
Dear Ada, Olga, Zac
To ensure that the Councils intent and highest environmental standards are maintained in the revised
contract under consideration this evening, EBMUD respectfully recommends the following refinements to
the proposed resolution:
Section8.TheFranchiseeshalldeliverallcommercialand multi-family sourceseparatedorganicstoEastBayMunicipalUtilityDistrict as

collected,andshallenterintoaseparateprocessingagreementwithEBMUDforthesematerials,
subjecttoapprovalbytheCityAdministrator.
These proposed edits are intended to provide clarification as to the intent of the City Council in order to facilitate
the subsequent development of an agreement between EBMUD and Waste Management.
EBMUD remains committed to providing environmental and community value to the City through organics
processing, irrespective of the Citys selected hauler. We thank you for your recognition of this value, and
we look forward to working with your staff and hauler to develop a processing agreement and begin
providing service to the City on July 1, 2015.
Greg
Gregory L. Chan
Public Affairs Office
East Bay Municipal Utility District
375 Eleventh Street (MS 802)
P.O. Box 24055
Oakland, CA 94623-1055
Office: (510) 287-0135
Fax: (510) 287-0149
e-mail: gchan@ebmud.com
website: www.ebmud.com
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Chan, Gregory
Bolotina, Olga
FW: A note from EBMUD, Greg Chan, about Zero Waste
Thursday, February 19, 2015 5:12:30 PM
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135
Fax: (510) 287-0149
From: Chan, Gregory
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 11:20 AM
To: zwald@oaklandnet.com; obalatina@oaklandnet.com; Chan, Ada (AChan1@oaklandnet.com);
'snosakhare@oaklandnet.com'; sthao@oaklandnet.com
Subject: RE: A note from EBMUD, Greg Chan, about Zero Waste
Dear Zac, Olga, Ada, Shereda and Sheng

Heres an update on EBMUDs communications with Public Works staff on the Zero Waste
contract and how the Waste Management contract with Oakland seriously influences what
can happen between EBMUD and Waste Management. As you know EBMUD has been
diligently trying to speak with PW staff directly (Brooke and Susan) for months.
On Tuesday, John Flores had agreed to meet with us for 10 minutes on Wednesday. Shortly
before noon yesterday (Wednesday) we received a written response from Susan (PW Deputy
Director) responding to the 10 issues EBMUD had asked be addressed in the Oakland-WM
contract. In general, the written responses suggested that they do not need to make any
changes to the Oakland-WM contract to address our issues.
John Flores did, indeed, meet with us and did so for 1 hours with Susan Kattchee, Brooke
Levin and Becky ? This is the meeting we could have had months ago. During this meeting
we went over all 10 of our issues. Issues that we had previously reviewed extensively with
staff via letters and with Henry Gardner in person. However, we were told that many things
had been already agreed upon with Waste Management. However, they would take several of
our points and see what could be done.
Thanks to John, it was a helpful discussion, one that we would have liked to have months ago.
They heard our issues and the discussion suggested that they might be able to make some
changes but no promises.
Oakland PW staff, Susan Kattchee, agreed to contact us this afternoon (Thursday) to see what
they are willing to do. Please standby as we may need your support and that of your
Councilmembers, Friday, depending on what we hear back. For your assistance, counsel and
actions we are grateful. More as I get it. With much appreciation. Greg
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135
Fax: (510) 287-0149
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Sherman, Steve
Bolotina, Olga
FW: Re-sending Fact Sheet
Thursday, March 06, 2014 9:57:27 AM
Oakland Fact Sheet--revised 2-14-14.pdf
Re-sending just the fact sheet. Maybe the packet was too large to send electronically.
Steven Sherman
Tel. : 510-287-0818 direct

From: Sherman, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 2:45 PM
To: 'Olga Bolotina'
Subject: Re-sending Fact Sheet
Hello Olga,
As you requested, this is the fact sheet that was contained in the packet (re-sending) that was
addressed to Councilmember Kalb, dated February 19, 2014, from Mr. Doug Linney.
Thank you for your interest,
Steven Sherman
Tel. : 510-287-0818 direct
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
June Monach
Bolotina, Olga
FW: TRAMUTOLA Request
Thursday, March 27, 2014 1:43:28 PM
494F3DD7-5CB5-4191-A37E-CCA5297C77A0[1].png
494F3DD7-5CB5-4191-A37E-CCA5297C77A0[4].png
Hello Olga,
I just left you a voice mail re the email below.
Thank you for your attention!
--
June Monach
191 Ridgeway Avenue

Oakland, CA 94611
Ph: (510) 658-7003
http://www.tramutola.com
From: June Monach <junem@tramutola.com>

Date: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 at 6:11 PM
To: Olga Bolotina <obolotina@oaklandnet.com>
Cc: Lolis Ramirez <lolisr@tramutola.com>
Subject: TRAMUTOLA Request
Olga,
I left a voice mail for you today. Larry Tramutola needs to speak with Council Member Kalb as soon as
possible re: the Waste Management contract with the City of Oakland.
10-15 minutes by phone would be ideal. Sooner is better than later. Please let us know when they can talk.
Thank you.
--
June Monach
191 Ridgeway Avenue

Oakland, CA 94611
Ph: (510) 658-7003
http://www.tramutola.com
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Wald, Zachary
Bolotina, Olga
FW: Zero Waste Message for Draft Press/constitutent message
Monday, September 22, 2014 5:29:28 PM
Zachary Wald
Chief of Staff for Lynette McElhaney
Oakland City Councilmember, District 3
510-238-7032
From: Wald, Zachary

Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 12:04 PM
To: Kernighan, Pat; McElhaney, Lynette (lmcelhaney@oaklandnet.com)
Subject: Zero Waste Message
Message:
If Waste Management had come to the table with this same offer in May, then I believe that this
Council would have approved the contract with Waste Management.
It is because the City Council held firm, that we have finally gotten to where we wanted to be on the
services and costs.:
*Most importantly, we drove down the costs from Waste Management's original proposal by almost
(50%? need to fact check)
*We expanded our contract with a local business, California Waste Solutions (CWS), from collecting
one-half of the Citys recycling, to collecting all of the Citys recycling
*We brought together Waste Management with EBMUD so that Oaklands restaurant food waste
will be turned into clean, green electricity at EBMUDs waste-to-energy plant
*We made sure that there is a job-training component for Oakland youth to be involved in this
growing industry, with our local partner Civicorps
Sometimes youve got to fight to get the best deal for your residents. Thats what happened here.
The City Council was a tough negotiator, and we won a better contract for our residents.
I think that all of us and all of our residents are happy to declare the end of the Garbage Wars and
the beginning of our next steps towards reaching our zero-waste goals
Zachary Wald

510-238-7032
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Maher, Sean
Bolotina, Olga
Got a few minutes tomorrow?
Sunday, June 21, 2015 1:15:52 PM
Olga, happy Sunday!
On Monday the Zero Waste team is expecting multifamily (apartment building) property managers
to get information regarding their new trash, compost and recycling rates. This is the latest in a
series of communications to various customer groups, and theres some information we need to
brief you on ASAP to prepare you for any calls your office might get as a result.
Do you have ten minutes sometime Monday when we can speak by phone so we can brief you? I
think its important that we speak but I will keep it short.
-Sean Maher
Zero Waste Outreach Program Manager, Environmental Services Division
City of Oakland | OaklandPublic Works | APWA Accredited
250 Frank H Ogawa Plaza, Ste. 5301 | Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 238-7968 Direct |(510) 473-2610 Cell
smaher@oaklandnet.com
Recycling Hotline |(510) 238-SAVE (7283) | recycling@oaklandnet.com

www.oaklandrecyles.com
Report A Problem | Public Works Call Center | (510) 615-5566

www.oaklandpw.com | opwcallcenter@oaklandnet.com | Mobile app: SeeClickFix
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Bolotina, Olga
Bolotina, Olga
Joint Councilmember Letter- Zero Waste Franchise
Friday, July 18, 2014 3:26:16 PM
Zero Waste Letter.pdf
Dear Friends,
We wanted to keep you informed on the Zero Waste Franchise contract that will come before
Oakland City Council on July 30th.
Thank you for your workthus farin support of Third Bin (organics, composting, green waste bin) for
multifamily buildings in Oakland, fair wages for recycling workers and use of the EBMUD facility for
dealing with Oaklands organic/green waste. Concerns regarding the implementation if these and
other provisions in the final contract are expressed in the letter sent to Henry Gardner, City
Administrator and Brooke Levin, Public Works Agency Director from Councilmembers Kalb, Gibson
McElhaney and Kaplan. Please see the letter attached.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
We would also appreciate your help in making sure these provisions are on the top of the priority list
when Councilmembers are making their decision regarding the contract.
How you can help:

Come to theSpecial Oakland City Council meeting on July 30th at 5:30pm at Oakland City
Hall Council Chambers,1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Oakland, CA(entrance/exit of the 14th
street)and speak in support of the mandatory Third Bin for all Oaklanders.
Send a letter (please let me know if you would like a sample letter)in support of the
mandatory green organics/composting bin for multi-family residential buildings addressed
tothe full Council, City Administrator; the Mayor; and the Public Works Agency Director
(<Council@oaklandnet.com>; <cityadministrator@oaklandnet.com>;
<officeofthemayor@oaklandnet.com>; <blevin@oaklandnet.com>).
Thank you so much for your support!
Olga
Olga A. Bolotina
Community Outreach Director
Office of District One City Councilmember Dan Kalb
City of Oakland
1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 230, Oakland, CA 94612
Direct: 510-238-7240
obolotina@oaklandnet.com
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Wald, Zachary
Bolotina, Olga
Farmer, Casey
Letter to Henry Gardner
Thursday, July 17, 2014 4:44:01 PM
Olga
We would like to add a question about Civicorps/Commercial Green Waste to your letter.
Here is suggested language, taken from an earlier email that we sent to Mr. Gardner (to which we
did not receive a response):
----------------------------------Civicorps has presented the City with an unsolicited proposal to collect commercial organics citywide
as part of the Zero Waste contract. We understand that PWA staff told Mr. Lessik, the head of
Civicorps, that due to the fact that the proposal was unsolicited, they are unable to respond.
Civicorps offers disadvantaged young people with both a high school completion program and highquality job training. They are based out of West Oakland but serve young people from across the
City. They have done commercial recycling in Oakland for many years, and have built a substantial
commercial organics recycling service over the last three years. Civicorps proposal is lower cost
than the current bidders, it achieves a higher diversion rate, sends green waste to the EBMUD
energy facility, and supports job training programs for hard-to-employee Oakland youth. This is a
win-win-win-win situation.
We ask that you create a pathway in the selection process for the Civicorps proposal to be
considered along with those of the two other bidders.
----------------
Zachary Wald
510-238-7032
FACT SHEET
EBMUD Organics Processing Services for the City of Oakland
Purpose: EBMUD wants to partner with the City of Oakland to generate local renewable energy and
jobs by reusing locally produced organic materials to generate renewable products from local wastes.
BACKGROUND
EBMUD is the national leader in anaerobic digestion of organic wastes. Our Oakland plant is the first
net energy producing wastewater plant in the nation. We have over 10 years of experience with food
waste processing, including Commercial Source Separated Organics (CSSO) from Contra Costa, San
Francisco, and Oakland. We are ready to commit to processing all of Oaklands CSSO material.
Project Description: EBMUD will anaerobically digest all of Oaklands commercial and multifamily SSO. Assuming 25,000 tons per year, EBMUD could produce:
o Renewable Energy 1 MW (electric power for ~1,200 homes), converting approximately
three-quarters of pre-processed feedstock into renewable energy for use in Oakland.
o Recycled Soil Products 100% diversion credit under state regulation, through use of the
remaining one-quarter, termed digestate, as alternative daily cover at landfills (2/3) and as
an agricultural soil amendment (1/3).
Council Support for Local Agency Participation: City Council resolutions state, Zero Waste System
RFP shall encourage maximization of local business presence and participation, including
participation by local non-profits and public agencies.
PROJECT BENEFITS
Anaerobic digestion at EBMUD provides greater net benefits compared to other organics processing
options.
Achieves Zero Waste: By processing all of Oakland's CSSO at our Oakland wastewater plant,
approximately 25,000 tons per year of material would be managed locally, with all material diverted
from landfill disposal in accordance with state regulation.
Reduces Greenhouse Gases: Using EBMUD organics processing achieves reductions in greenhouse
gas emissions compared with other options, consistent with the City's Energy and Climate Action
Plan.
Creates Local Jobs and Local Energy Production: Local renewable energy production creates green
jobs in Oakland while reducing the City's reliance on distant, non-renewable, less sustainable
sources of energy.
Generates Revenue for City Services: EBMUD is prepared to share a portion of the energy value
derived from Oakland's food waste with the City.
Provides a Solution for Managing Organics from Multi-Family Sources: EBMUD can process
source-separated organics and is interested in processing organics derived from multi-family mixed
waste. A pre-processing technology for this latter material has been identified.
A Decent Standard for Oaklands Recycling Workers Whats the Cost?

Recycling workers in Alameda County are fighting for family-supporting wages and affordable family health
insurance. Currently, sorters serving cities and sanitary districts in the County, through franchise
agreements, earn as little as $11.97 per hour. Their goal is to reach a wage of $21 per hour by 2019, while
also ensuring they receive quality, affordable health coverage for their families. Guaranteeing decent
wages and benefits is the right thing to do, but how much will it cost?
Fremont: A Model for Alameda County
The city of Fremont recently approved a small rate increase to improve the wage package for recycling
workers at the Fremont Transfer Station. The sixty five workers at the facility will receive increases over six
years ranging from $6.53 per hour to $7.37 per hour. Lower-paid workers will receive larger increases than
higher-paid workers. As a result, sorters, the lowest paid recycling workers, will see their wages rise from
$13.90 in 2013 to $20.94 in 2019. Baler operators will go from $16.87 in 2013 to $23.61 and mechanics will see
increases to $32.49 per hour in 2019, from $26.22.1
Residential customers in the City of Fremont will contribute 92% of the total wage increases. The cities of
Newark and Union City, which also use the Transfer Station, will provide the remaining 8%.
The increase to Fremont rate payers, which is helping to fund the wage package for 2014 and 2015, was just
$.32 per month per household. 2 This small increase will cover not only the wage increases, but also a
number of outstanding expenses extraordinary adjustments owed by the city to BLT Enterprises, which
operates the Transfer Station. Only about 36% of the increase to residents -- less than $.12 per household
per month -- is going toward the workers wage package. 3
The Cost to Oakland Residents
Two companies are vying for Oaklands residential recycling contract CA Waste Solutions (CWS) and
Waste Management/Recycle America. Currently, the two companies both provide residential recycling
services to Oakland, splitting the citys 165,000+ households between them.
CA Waste Solutions
Since the bid process with the City of Oakland closed, the ILWU has worked with CWS to analyze the cost
of providing a better wage package to CWS recycling workers. 4 Currently, the company employs about 52
workers. Implementing a series of wage package increases, starting July 1, 2015 the date the new
Oakland franchise agreement goes into effect to get workers to a wage of $21 per hour by 2019 with full
family health benefits, we calculated it would cost Oakland rate payers an average of about $.15 more per
month in each of five successive years. The increase includes an additional 25% of total wages to cover
Fremont Staff Report (ID #1904), December 10, 2013, p. 6. See reference to ILWU Schedule A 2014.
Fremont Staff Report (ID #1904), December 10, 2013, p. 5.
3
Fremont Staff Report (ID #1904), December 10, 2013, p. 1. The city of Fremont provides per-ton figures for the various
extraordinary adjustments provided BLT. The per-ton figures refer to tipping fees charged to the citys waste and
recycling hauler, Republic. These per-ton increases are then recouped by Republic when it bills customers for service.
4
CWS currently only pays for employees health insurance and workers are unable to afford family coverage on their
low wages.
2
employer taxes and assumes employees are paid for 2,353 hours per year. 5 CA Waste Solutions estimated
costs for 52 workers are shown in Appendix A
CWS recently reported it may have up to 95 or even 110 employees at its Oakland facility when the new
recycling franchise agreement goes into effect. The estimate by CWS and the ILWU for the increased cost
of meeting the workers wage package standard for the greater numbers of employees is an average of
$.27 per household per month for 95 workers and $.56 per household per month for 110 employees. The
cost will vary depending upon a number of factors, including: the number of employees; the number of
single employees versus those with families requiring health insurance; and the health insurance plan.
See Appendix B for an estimate of costs if CWS receives the franchise agreement and employs 95 workers
and Appendix C for an estimate for 110 employees.
Waste Management
Based on available information, we also have developed an estimate for the increase in costs to rate payers
should Waste Management be awarded the recycling franchise agreement. According to one scenario
which we consider to be viable, the average increase in rates would average just $.23 per month per
household over five years. See Appendix D for an estimate of increases with Waste Management as the
recycling services provider.
Conclusion
We believe it will require only a small increase for Oakland residents to fund wage increases for hard
working recyclers. However, these wage increases will be life changing for recycling workers, allowing
them to leave poverty behind. These wage increases will help workers pay for their everyday needs rent,
food, gas, childcare, utilities and also provide more disposable income to spend in their local
communities, which will help the local economy. Its time we recognize that we must pay the true price for
the services we want and need to get reach Oaklands goal of Zero Waste.
CWS reports that most employees do not take vacation or other paid time off. The 2,352 hours per year represents
payment of 272 hours for unused paid time off which is then paid-out to the employee. A 40-hour week would result
in 2,080 total hours annually.
Appendix A Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, CWS as Recycling Franchisee (52 Workers)
Total Annual Cost Increase

Expense for All Employees
Number of Households
Cost per Unit per Year
Cost per Unit per Year Increase
Over the Current Year
Cost Increase per Unit per
Month
Cost Increase per Unit per
Month Over the Current Year
Wage Package Analysis

07/01/1501/01/1601/01/1712/31/15
12/31/16
12/31/17
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
$283,210
$ 251,750
$279,289
$289,494
$ 337,514
165,239
$
1.71
165,239
$
1.52
165,239
$
1.69
165,239
$
1.75
165,239
$ 2.04
1.71
3.24
4.93
6.68
8.72
0.14
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.17
0.14
0.27
0.41
0.56
0.73
Average
0.15
Appendix B - Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, CWS as Recycling Franchisee (95 Workers)
C Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, CWS as Recycling Franchisee (52 Workers)
Wage Package Analysis
07/01/1501/01/1601/01/1712/31/15
12/31/16
12/31/17
Total Annual Cost Increased Expense
for All Employees
Number of Units
Cost per Unit per Year Increase Over
the Current Year
Cost Increased per Unit per Month
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
$ 517,402
$ 459,927
$ 510,240
$ 528,884
$ 616,611
165,239
$
3.13
165,239
$
2.78
165,239
$
3.09
165,239
$
3.20
165,239
$
3.73
3.13
5.91
9.00
12.20
15.93
0.26
0.23
0.26
0.27
0.31
0.26
0.49
0.75
1.02
1.33
Average
$ 0.27
Appendix C Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, CWS as Recycling Franchisee (110 Workers)
Wages Package Analysis
07/01/1501/01/1601/01/1712/31/15
12/31/16
12/31/17
Total Annual Cost Increased
Expense for All Employees
Number of Units
Cost per Unit per Year Increase
Cost Increase per Unit per Month
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
$ 1,229,786
$ 671,299
$ 744,818
$ 783,348
$ 903,732
165,239
$
7.44
165,239
$
4.06
165,239
$
4.51
165,239
$
4.74
165,239
$
5.47
7.44
16.01
20.75
26.22
1.24
0.34
0.38
0.40
0.46
1.24
1.58
1.95
2.35
2.81
11.51
Average
$ 0.56
Appendix D - Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, WM as Recycling Franchisee (130 Workers)
07/01/15 12/31/15
$2.00
1,176
130
01/01/1612/31/16
$1.00
2,352
130
01/01/1712/31/17
$1.25
2,352
130
01/01/1812/31/18
$1.25
2,352
130
01/01/1912/31/19
$1.50
2352
130
$382,200
$382,200
$477,750
$477,750
$573,300
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
Cost Increase per Unit per Year
$2.31
$2.31
$2.89
$2.89
$3.47
Cost Increase per Unit Per Year Over

the Current Year
$2.31
$4.63
$7.52
$10.41
$13.88
Cost Increase Per Month
$0.19
$0.19
$0.24
$0.24
$0.29

$0.19
$0.39
$0.63
$0.87
$1.16
Wage Increase
Total Hours
Number of Employees
Total Employer Increase Expense
(Wages and Taxes @ 25%)
Number of Units
Average
$.23
A Decent Standard for Oaklands Recycling Workers Whats the Cost?

Recycling workers in Alameda County are fighting for family-supporting wages and affordable family health
insurance. Currently, sorters serving cities and sanitary districts in the County, through franchise
agreements, earn as little as $11.97 per hour. Their goal is to reach a wage of about $21 per hour by 2019,
while also ensuring they receive quality, affordable health coverage for their families. Guaranteeing decent
wages and benefits is the right thing to do, but how much will it cost?
Fremont: A Model for Alameda County
The city of Fremont recently approved a small rate increase to improve the wage package for recycling
workers at the Fremont Transfer Station. The sixty five workers at the facility will receive increases over six
years ranging from $6.53 per hour to $7.37 per hour. Lower-paid workers will receive larger increases than
higher-paid workers. As a result, sorters, the lowest paid recycling workers, will see their wages rise from
$13.90 in 2013 to $20.94 in 2019. Baler operators will go from $16.87 in 2013 to $23.61 and mechanics will see
increases to $32.49 per hour in 2019, from $26.22. 1
The City of Fremont will contribute 92% of the total wage increases. The cities of Newark and Union City,
which also use the Transfer Station, will provide the remaining 8%.
The increase to Fremont rate payers, which is helping to fund the wage package for 2014 and 2015, was just
$.32 per month per household. 2 This small increase will cover not only the wage increases, but also a
number of outstanding expenses extraordinary adjustments owed by the city to BLT Enterprises,
which operates the Transfer Station. Only about 36% of the increase to residents less than $.12 per
household per month is going toward the workers wage package. 3
The Cost to Oakland Residents
Two companies are vying for Oaklands residential recycling contract CA Waste Solutions (CWS) and
Waste Management/Recycle America. Currently, the two companies both provide residential recycling
services to Oakland, splitting the citys 165,000+ households between them.
CA Waste Solutions
CA Waste Solutions employs about 52 workers. We calculated the cost to the company of implementing a
series of wage increases the same increases as those approved by the City of Fremont starting July 1,
2015, the date the new Oakland franchise agreement goes into effect. In order to get workers to a wage of
$20.94 per hour by January 1, 2019, with full family health benefits, 4 we calculated it would cost Oakland
rate payers an average of about $.22 more per month in each of five successive years. The increase includes
an additional 25% of total wages to cover employer taxes and assumes employees are paid for 2,353 hours
per year. 5 The health insurance costs are based on the cost of the companys current health insurance plan
1
Fremont Staff Report (ID #1904), December 10, 2013, p. 6. See reference to ILWU Schedule A 2014.
Fremont Staff Report (ID #1904), December 10, 2013, p. 5.
3
Fremont Staff Report (ID #1904), December 10, 2013, p. 1. The city of Fremont provides per-ton figures for the various
extraordinary adjustments requested by BLT. The per-ton figures refer to tipping fees charged to the citys waste and recycling
hauler, Republic. These per-ton increases are then recouped by Republic when the company bills customers for service.
4
CWS currently only pays for employees health insurance and workers are unable to afford family coverage on their low wages.
5
CWS reports that most employees do not take vacation or other paid time off. The 2,352 hours per year represents payment of
272 hours for unused paid time off which is then paid-out to the employee. A 40-hour week would result in 2,080 total hours
annually. Workers do not take time off because they cannot afford to live on the wages they earn for a 40-hour week.
2
and we have assumed an 11% increase annually, based on past increases in the cost of the plan. The
estimate assumes the same percentage of workers requiring employee only, employee + 1, and
family coverage as the current work force. 6 The estimated rate increase is based on a total of 165,239
household units in Oakland. 7 CA Waste Solutions estimated costs for 52 workers are shown in Appendix A
CWS recently reported it may have up to 95 or even 110 employees at its Oakland facility when the new
recycling franchise agreement goes into effect. The estimate for the increased cost of meeting the
workers wage package standard for the greater numbers of employees is an average of about $.41 per
household per month for 95 workers. This estimate includes wages and benefits and assumes the same
percentage of workers employed in each of the job classifications and the same percentage of workers
requiring the various levels of health insurance coverage, e.g. employee only, family, etc. See
Appendix B for an estimate of costs if CWS receives the franchise agreement and employs 95 workers.
Waste Management
We also have developed an estimate for the increase in costs to rate payers should Waste Management be
awarded the recycling franchise agreement. As in the CWS analysis, this analysis assumes the same wage
increases approved by the City of Fremont, with the first increase implemented on July 1, 2015 and the
lowest paid workers achieving a wage of $20.94 by January 1, 2019. All wage differentials between job
classifications remain the same. The estimate assumes Waste Management will employ the same number
of recycling workers at its Davis Street facility (130) as it does currently. For consistencys sake, the
estimate assumes workers will be paid for 2,352 hours per year. As seen in Appendix C, we estimate that
Oakland households could expect to pay an average of about $.33 per month over five years if Waste
Management gets the recycling contract.
Conclusion
We believe it will require only a small increase for Oakland residents to fund wage increases for hard
working recyclers. However, these wage increases will be life changing for recycling workers, allowing
them to leave poverty behind. These wage increases will help workers pay for their everyday needs rent,
food, gas, childcare, utilities and also provide more disposable income to spend in their local communities,
which will help the local economy. Its time we recognize that we must pay the true price for the services
we want and need to get reach Oaklands goal of Zero Waste.
6
7
A survey of workers conducted in 2013 asked workers about their family composition.
This figure was provided by CA Waste Solutions. A company representative reported having received this figure from Oakland
staff. Peter Slote, in Oaklands Environmental Services Department, provided us a figure of 163,000 units. Because we were
conferring with CWS on the cost analysis at one point last year, we used the companys figure for the sake of consistency.
Appendix A Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, CWS as Recycling Franchisee (52 Workers)
Wages
07/01/15 12/31/15
01/01/1612/31/16
01/01/1712/31/17
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
Wage Increase
$3.71
$1.18
$1.26
$1.36
$1.46
Total Hours
1,176
2,352
2,352
2,352
2352
52
52
52
52
52
$283,592
$463,991
$192,629
$207,917
$223,205
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
$1.72
$2.81
$1.17
$1.26
$1.35

the Current Year
$1.72
$4.52
$5.69
$6.95
$8.30
$0.14
$0.23
$0.10
$0.10
$0.11

$0.14
$0.38
$0.47
$0.58
$0.69
Number of Employees
Number of Units
Average
$0.14
Health Insurance
Average Monthly Cost per Employee

Average Monthly Cost Increase per
Employee
Number of Employees
Total Annual Cost Increase for All
Employees
Number of Units
Cost Increased per Unit per Year
Cost Increased per Unit per Year Over
the Current Year
07/01/15 12/31/15
$899
01/01/1612/31/16
$1,352
01/01/1712/31/17
$1,500
01/01/1812/31/18
$1,665
01/01/1912/31/19
$1,849
$377
$453
$149
$165
$183
52
52
52
52
52
$234,958
$282,707
$92,776
$102,981
$114,309
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
$1.42
$1.71
$0.56
$0.62
$0.69
$1.42
$3.13
$3.69
$4.32
$5.01
$0.12
$0.14
$0.05
$0.05
$0.06
$0.12
$0.26
$0.31
$0.36
$0.42
Average
$0.08
Total Wages and Health Insurance

07/01/1512/31/15
Total Annual Cost Increase Expense
for All Employees
Number of Units
Cost per Unit per Year Increase Over
the Current Year
01/01/1612/31/16
01/01/1712/31/17
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
$518,550
$746,698
$285,404
$310,898
$337,514
165,239
$3.14
165,239
$4.52
165,239
$1.73
165,239
$1.88
165,239
$2.04
$3.14
$7.66
$9.38
$11.27
$13.31
$0.26
$0.38
$0.14
$0.16
$0.17
$0.26
$0.64
$0.78
$0.94
$1.11
Average
$0.22
Appendix B - Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, CWS as Recycling Franchisee (95 Workers)
C Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents,
CWS as Recycling Franchisee (52 Workers)
Wages
07/01/15 12/31/15
01/01/1612/31/16
01/01/1712/31/17
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
Wage Increase
$3.71
$1.18
$1.26
$1.36
$1.46
Total Hours
1,176
2,352
2,352
2,352
2352
95
95
95
95
95
$518,102
$847,675
$351,918
$379,848
$407,778
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
$3.14
$5.13
$2.13
$2.30
$2.47
Cost Increase per Unit Per Year Over the

Current Year
$3.14
$8.27
$10.40
$12.69
$15.16
$0.26
$0.43
$0.18
$0.19
$0.21
Cost Increase per Unit per Month Over the

Current Year
$0.26
$0.69
$0.87
$1.06
$1.26
Health Insurance
07/01/15 01/01/1612/31/15
12/31/16
$898
$1,351
01/01/1712/31/17
$1,499
01/01/1812/31/18
$1,664
01/01/1912/31/19
$1,847
Number of Employees
Total Employer Increase Expense (Wages and
Taxes @ 25%)
Number of Units
Average Monthly Cost per Employee

Average Monthly Cost Increase per Employee
$376
$453
$149
$165
$183
95
$428,837
95
$515,981
95
$169,393
95
$188,026
95
$208,709
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
$2.60
$3.12
$1.03
$1.14
$1.26
Cost Increase per Unit per Year Over the

Current Year
$2.60
$5.72
$6.74
$7.88
$9.14
$0.22
$0.26
$0.09
$0.09
$0.11

Current Year
$0.22
$0.48
$0.56
$0.66
$0.76
Number of Employees
Total Annual Cost Increase for All Employees
Number of Units
Total Wages and Health Insurance

07/01/15 01/01/1601/01/1712/31/15
12/31/16
12/31/17
Total Annual Cost Increase Expense for All
Employees
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
$946,939
$1,363,656
$521,311
$567,874
$616,487
165,239
$5.73
165,239
$8.25
165,239
$3.15
165,239
$3.44
165,239
$3.73
$5.73
$13.98
$17.14
$20.57
$24.31
$0.48
$0.69
$0.26
$0.29
$0.31

Current Year
$0.48
$1.17
$1.43
$1.71
$2.03
Number of Units
Cost per Unit per Year Increase Over the
Current Year
Average
$0.25
Average
$0.15
Average
$0.41
Appendix C - Estimated Rate Increase for Oakland Residents, WM as Recycling Franchisee (130 Workers)
07/01/15 12/31/15
01/01/1612/31/16
01/01/1712/31/17
01/01/1812/31/18
01/01/1912/31/19
Wage Increase
$3.18
$1.18
$1.26
$1.36
$1.46
Total Hours
1,176
2,352
2,352
2,352
2352
130
130
130
130
130
$607,698
$1,058,694
$481,572
$519,792
$558,012
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
165,239
$3.68
$6.41
$2.91
$3.15
$3.38

the Current Year
$3.68
$10.08
$13.00
$16.14
$19.52
$0.31
$0.53
$0.24
$0.26
$0.28

$0.31
$0.84
$1.08
$1.35
$1.63
Number of Employees
Number of Units
Average
$0.33
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Ordaz, Karely
Farmer, Casey
Bolotina, Olga
Re: 3/11 Presentation
Tuesday, March 04, 2014 10:44:22 PM
Right, I meant adding bulky pick up to multi-family units (more than 4).
Karely Ordaz
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:37 PM, "Farmer, Casey" <CFarmer@oaklandnet.com> wrote:
>
> Hmmm they already do it ...
>
> -----Original Message----> From: Ordaz, Karely
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 10:30 PM
> To: Farmer, Casey
> Cc: Bolotina, Olga
> Subject: Re: 3/11 Presentation
>
> I believe he was particularly referring to the cost (city & WM) of
> adding bulky pick up.
>
> Karely Ordaz
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>>> On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:23 PM, "Farmer, Casey" <CFarmer@oaklandnet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I too got a call from David last week but haven't called him back. To
>> my understanding, we don't offer any information about costs - but
>> expect the proposers to submit that information to us.
>>
>> Or is he referring to how much we expect the workers to be paid?
>>
>> -----Original Message---->> From: Ordaz, Karely
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 8:54 PM
>> To: Farmer, Casey; Bolotina, Olga
>> Subject: 3/11 Presentation
>>
>> Hello lovely ladies,
>>
>> Are we moving forward with a PowerPoint presentation for 3/11? What's
>> the plan?
>>
>> I received a call from David Tucker from Waste Management asking for
>> clarification on the cost analysis (I haven't called him back yet).
>> Let's discuss further tomorrow.
>>
>> Good night!
>>
>> Karely Ordaz
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Chan, Gregory
Wald, Zachary; Bolotina, Olga
RE: A note from EBMUD, Greg Chan
Monday, February 09, 2015 12:26:04 PM
Thanks Zac. Greg

Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135
Fax: (510) 287-0149
From: Wald, Zachary [mailto:ZWald@oaklandnet.com]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 12:03 PM
To: Chan, Gregory; Bolotina, Olga
Subject: RE: A note from EBMUD, Greg Chan
Gregory
I am resending your message to Olga with the correct email address.
Thanks,
Zac
Zachary Wald
510-238-7032
From: Chan, Gregory [mailto:gchan@ebmud.com]

Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 11:51 AM
To: Wald, Zachary; obalatina@oaklandnet.com
Cc: Chan, Gregory
Subject: A note from EBMUD, Greg Chan
Zac and Olga,
Below is the gist of what would work for us. I realize there have been some glitches. The best thing
now would be to meet asap. How is tomorrow (Tuesday 2/10) at 10:15 AM?
EBMUD requests that the City Administrator not sign the Mixed Materials and Organics (MMO)
Agreement with Waste Management until weve had a chance to review it. Weve communicated to
City staff a number of areas where, if the language in the Agreement is not revised before the City
signs it, EBMUD will be significantly disadvantaged in our subcontract negotiations with WM. We
sat down with Henry Gardner about this a week or two ago.
I saw Lynette this weekend and she wanted us to sit down to work toward ensuring EBMUD can
successfully participate in this program as the Council intended. EBMUD has had very limited
opportunity to interact with PW staff on this to date, despite numerous attempts. We believe the
outstanding issues are largely straightforward and can be resolved quickly through active
communication.
With appreciation. Greg

Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135
Fax: (510) 287-0149
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Chan, Gregory
Bolotina, Olga
RE: EBMUD fact sheet for Zero Waste Oakland
Thursday, May 29, 2014 3:07:43 PM
Already done. G
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135

Fax: (510) 287-0149
From: Bolotina, Olga [mailto:OBolotina@oaklandnet.com]

Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 2:47 PM
To: Chan, Gregory; Kalb, Dan
Subject: RE: EBMUD fact sheet for Zero Waste Oakland
Greg, you might want to send all the relevant materials to the whole Council and staff. Thank you!
Olga
Olga A. Bolotina
City of Oakland
Direct: 510-238-7240

Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:20 PM
To: Kalb, Dan; Bolotina, Olga
Subject: EBMUD fact sheet for Zero Waste Oakland
Dan/Olga
Heres a fact sheet that should help hone in on issues regarding the zero waste proposal from
Waste Management----bulleted and to the point. Call, phone, text if you need anything
more.Well be there tonight to buttress with additional data and findings. Greg
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135

Fax: (510) 287-0149
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Chan, Gregory
Ada Chan
Chan, Ada; Bolotina, Olga; Wald, Zachary; Chan, Gregory
RE: EBMUD"s edits for the zero waste resolution
Monday, September 22, 2014 2:23:17 PM
Yes. That price is for as-collected commercial organic material, meaning WM or Civicorps
would bring it straight to EBMUD from routes and we would be responsible for having it preprocessed to remove contaminants prior to digestion. The spec is that the material must
contain no more than 5% contamination.
(Note that this price is for commercial. We havent yet discussed pricing for residential.)
ALSO NOTE AN ADDITION TO OUR EDIT OF THE RESOLUTION, UNDERLINED:
Section 8. The Franchisee shall deliver all commercial and multi-family sourceseparated organics to East Bay Municipal Utility District as
collected, and shall enter into a separate processing agreement with EBMUD for these materials,
subject to approval by the City Administrator. The Franchisee will discuss with EBMUD to develop a
long-term approach for converting the single-family organic stream to energy at the
EBMUD facility, and by July 1, 2018 shall develop
a separate processing agreement with EBMUD for delivering these materials, subject to
approval by the City Administrator.
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135

Fax: (510) 287-0149
From: Ada Chan [mailto:adachan510@gmail.com]

To: Chan, Gregory
Cc: Chan, Ada; Bolotina, Olga; Wald, Zachary
Subject: Re: EBMUD's edits for the zero waste resolution
and the details of the condition of the organic matter (separation etc) when EBMUD received
it in order to provide services at that price, is also outlined in those terms?
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Chan, Gregory <gchan@ebmud.com> wrote:
Ada, Zac, Olga
The Term Sheet we provided previously to WM had a price of $96 per ton, with annual
escalation based on CPI.
With respect to the other question(s), we have been assuming that WM would enter into 2
separate subcontracts with EBMUD and Civicorps. Greg
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135

Fax: (510) 287-0149
From: Chan, Ada [mailto:AChan1@oaklandnet.com]

To: Chan, Gregory; adachan510@gmail.com; Bolotina, Olga; Wald, Zachary
Subject: RE: EBMUD's edits for the zero waste resolution
Waste Management needs certainty of cost over the 10 year period

Can EBMUD put in writing the terms it needs, in order to commit to costs over a 10 year
period.
I havent been part of these negotiations, so it is unclear to me Greg, why you are asking us to
get WM to commit to those terms, when it seems like those terms need to be agreed upon
between EBMUD and CivicCorps.
And that agreement gets ratified and adopted into the WM Contract.
Or is it two separate agreements ? one between WM and Civic Corps and one between WM
and EBMUD?
We do not want, WM to have any excuses to end the contract with EBMUD in year 6 after
their facility is built.
ada
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 11:13 AM
To: Ada Chan (adachan510@gmail.com); Chan, Ada; Bolotina, Olga; Wald, Zachary
Cc: Chan, Gregory
Subject: EBMUD's edits for the zero waste resolution
Dear Ada, Olga, Zac

To ensure that the Councils intent and highest environmental standards are maintained in the revised
contract under consideration this evening, EBMUD respectfully recommends the following refinements to
the proposed resolution:

Section8.TheFranchiseeshalldeliverallcommercialand multi-family sourceseparatedorganicstoEastBayMunicipalUtilityDistrict as
collected,andshallenterintoaseparateprocessingagreementwithEBMUDforthesematerials,
subjecttoapprovalbytheCityAdministrator.
These proposed edits are intended to provide clarification as to the intent of the City Council in order to facilitate the
subsequent development of an agreement between EBMUD and Waste Management.
EBMUD remains committed to providing environmental and community value to the City through organics
processing, irrespective of the Citys selected hauler. We thank you for your recognition of this value, and
we look forward to working with your staff and hauler to develop a processing agreement and begin
providing service to the City on July 1, 2015.
Greg
Gregory L. Chan
P.O. Box 24055
Office: (510) 287-0135

Fax: (510) 287-0149
-Ada Chan
phone: (510) 757-5646
e-mail: adachan510@gmail.com
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Bolotina, Olga
Dowdakin, Becky
Re: Sharing comprehensive rate tables
Friday, July 10, 2015 8:14:30 AM
Thank you!
Olga A. Bolotina, Chief of Staff
Office of District One City Councilmember Dan Kalb, City of Oakland
Direct: 510-238-7240
Click this link to subscribe to Councilmember Kalb's newsletter.
Report A Problem | Public Works Agency Call Center |(510) 615-5566
www.oaklandpw.com|pwacallcenter@oaklandnet.com |Mobile app:SeeClickFix
----- Reply message ----From: "Dowdakin, Becky" <BDowdakin@oaklandnet.com>
To: "Bolotina, Olga" <OBolotina@oaklandnet.com>
Cc: "Slote, Peter" <PSlote@oaklandnet.com>, "Maher, Sean" <SMaher@oaklandnet.com>
Subject: Sharing comprehensive rate tables
Date: Fri, Jul 10, 2015 8:12 AM
The following information was provided to single-family dwelling customers:
July 2015 Residential Garbage Service Rates Postcard provides service rates as of July 1,
2015. Over 83 thousand property owners will receive the postcard on or about June 19,
2015.
July 2015 Recycling Garbage Billing Insert - Rate Change and New Services presents new
rates and provides additional information about various service changes residents can expect
on or after July 1. On or about July 3, 2015, the insert will reach 66,651 residential property
owners by mail, and 16,423 electronic bill-pay customers will see a link.
And business customers:
An e-mail newsletter was distributed in mid-June to Oakland Zero Waste Program business
customers, informing them of rate and service changes coming July 1, 2015. The following
information is posted on the City website:
Important Changes to Trash, Recycling and Compost Services for Oakland Businesses
Frequently Asked Questions about July 1, 2015 Zero Waste Service Changes for Oakland
Businesses.
City of Oakland Monthly Trash & Compost Collection Service Rates For Businesses July 1,
2015 - June 30, 2016 (Adobe Acrobat format).
For multi-family dwelling building owners and managers, in addition to the rate sheets, a
tool kit of information has been developed and is distributed by EBRHA.
Becky Dowdakin
Environmental Services Manager
City of Oakland | Oakland Public Works Department | APWA Accredited Agency
(510) 238-6981 | (510) 238-7286 Fax
bdowdakin@oaklandnet.com

www.oaklandpw.com | pwacallcenter@oaklandnet.com | Mobile app: SeeClickFix
From: Bolotina, Olga

Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 7:56 AM
To: Dowdakin, Becky
Subject: Re: Sharing comprehensive rate tables
Thank you Becky.
Is that what residents/businesses receive with their monthly bill? Thank you for the
clarification.
Olga

Direct: 510-238-7240


Date: Fri, Jul 10, 2015 6:17 AM
Here you go.

1-4 unit Residential Rates
5+ Unit Residential Rates
Business Rates July 1, 2015
Becky Dowdakin
(510) 238-6981 | (510) 238-7286 Fax

From: Tucker, David [mailto:DTucker2@wm.com]

To: Bolotina, Olga; Dowdakin, Becky
Subject: RE: Sharing comprehensive rate tables
Good evening Olga, all of the approved rates can be found on the Oakland Recycles/Zero
Waste website. It includes both WM and CWS rates. I have included Becky Dowdakin on this
response as she can assist in pointing you to the right link.
David
David
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message -------From: "Bolotina, Olga" <OBolotina@oaklandnet.com>

Date: 07/09/2015 6:19 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: "Tucker, David" <DTucker2@wm.com>
Hello David,
Hope all is well.
Could you please send me a comprehensive list of charges that Oakland residents are receiving with
the new contract.
Thank you!
Olga

City of Oakland
Direct: 510-238-7240
Report A Problem | Public Works Agency Call Center | (510) 615-5566

Recycling is a good thing. Please recycle any printed emails.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Slote, Peter
Bolotina, Olga
RE: The final garbage contract
Thursday, October 22, 2015 9:06:52 AM
Olga - The First Amendment to Mixed Materials and Organics Collection Services Contract just executed is
also at www.zerowasteoakland.com, along with every report to Council, resolution and ordinance
associated with the procurement.
Peter Slote
Solid Waste & Recycling Program Supervisor, Environmental Services Division
City of Oakland | OaklandPublic Works | APWA Accredited
(510) 238-7432 | (510) 238-7286 Fax
pslote@oaklandnet.com
Recycling Hotline |(510) 238-SAVE (7283) | recycling@oaklandnet.com

www.oaklandrecyles.com

www.oaklandpw.com | opwcallcenter@oaklandnet.com | Mobile app: SeeClickFix
From: Dowdakin, Becky

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:36 AM
To: Bolotina, Olga
Cc: Near, Hilary R.; Slote, Peter; Levin, Brooke A.
Subject: RE: The final garbage contract
Olga Here are links to all the contract documents, which are posted on the Zero Waste
Oakland website. Not all the exhibits are complete; only the complete exhibits are linked
here.
Mixed Materials and Organics Collection Services Contract
MMO Exhibit 1 - Maximum Service Rates (rates amended by First Amendment)
MMO Exhibit 2 - Annual Rate Adjustment
MMO Exhibit 3 - Approved Facilities
MMO Exhibit 4 City Facilites (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 5 City-Sponsored Events (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 6 Transition Plan (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 7 Community Outreach Strategy (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 8 - Diversion Plan
MMO Exhibit 9 Customer Service Plan (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 10 - Collection Services Operations Plan
MMO Exhibit 11 - Contamination Reduction Plan
MMO Exhibit 12 - Vehicle Specifications
MMO Exhibit 13 - Container Specifications
MMO Exhibit 14 - Bulky Goods Collection Service Agreement
MMO Exhibit 15 Memorandum of Understanding (not yet available)

MMO Exhibit 16 Local Business Presence and Participation Reporting Form (not yet
available)
MMO Exhibit 16a Local Business Presence and Participation Requirements (not yet
available)
MMO Exhibit 17 Employee and Labor Relations Plan (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 18 - Guaranty Agreement
MMO Exhibit 19 - Business Tax Certificate
MMO Exhibit 20 Residue Tonnage Calculation Methodology (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 21 EBMUD Letter of June 13, 2014
First Amendment to Mixed Materials and Organics Collection Services Contract (Includes
amended rates)
Residential Recycling Collection Services Contract

RRExhibit 1 - Maximum Service Rates
RRExhibit 2 - Annual Rate Adjustments
RRExhibit 3 -Not Used
RRExhibit 4 City Facilites
RRExhibit 5 Transition Plan (not yet available)
RRExhibit 6 Community Outreach Strategy (not yet available)
RRExhibit 7 Diversion Recovery Plan
RRExhibit 8 - Customer Service Plan (not yet available)
RRExhibit 9 Recycling Collection Service Plan
RRExhibit 10 - Vehicle Specifications
RRExhibit 11 - Contamination Reduction Plan
RRExhibit 12 - Memorandum of Understanding (not yet available)
RRExhibit 13 - SFD & MFD Dwelling Units (not yet available)
RRExhibit 14 - Employee and Labor Relations Plan (not yet available)
RRExhibit 15 Guaranty Agreement (not yet available)
RRExhibit 16 Business Tax Certificate
Landfill Disposal Services Contract
Disposal Exhibit 1 - Approved Per Ton Disposal Tipping Fees
Disposal Exhibit 2 - Annual Tipping Fee Adjustment
Disposal Exhibit 3 - Guaranty Agreement
Disposal Exhibit 4 - Permits as of Contract Effective Date
Disposal Exhibit 5 - Employee and Labor Relations Plan (not yet available)
Disposal Exhibit 6 - Disposal Facility
Becky Dowdakin
(510) 238-6981 | (510) 238-7286 Fax

From: Levin, Brooke A.

Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 8:08 PM
To: Bolotina, Olga
Cc: Near, Hilary R.; Dowdakin, Becky; Slote, Peter
Subject: Re: The final garbage contract
Olga,
I will have the link sent to you.

Brooke A. Levin
Director
Oakland Public Works
On Oct 21, 2015, at 6:43 PM, "Bolotina, Olga" <OBolotina@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

Hello Brooke,
I hope you had a great time last weekend at the Autumn Lights. I heard it was a lot of
fun.
Would you be able to send us the links to the final garbage contract with all the
relevant addendums. Thank you!
All the very best,
Olga

City of Oakland
Direct: 510-238-7240

From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Dowdakin, Becky
Bolotina, Olga
Near, Hilary R.; Slote, Peter; Levin, Brooke A.
RE: The final garbage contract
Thursday, October 22, 2015 10:25:47 AM
Yes, this is all public information that we provide on our website.
Becky Dowdakin
(510) 238-6981 | (510) 238-7286 Fax

From: Bolotina, Olga

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 10:24 AM
To: Dowdakin, Becky
Cc: Near, Hilary R.; Slote, Peter; Levin, Brooke A.
Thank you so much Becky and all.
I'm assuming that we can share all this info below with the residents, correct? Thank you.
Olga

Direct: 510-238-7240


Cc: "Near, Hilary R." <HNear@oaklandnet.com>, "Slote, Peter" <PSlote@oaklandnet.com>,
"Levin, Brooke A." <blevin@oaklandnet.com>
Subject: The final garbage contract

Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 08:35
Olga Here are links to all the contract documents, which are posted on the Zero Waste
Oakland website. Not all the exhibits are complete; only the complete exhibits are linked
here.
Mixed Materials and Organics Collection Services Contract
MMO Exhibit 1 - Maximum Service Rates (rates amended by First Amendment)
MMO Exhibit 2 - Annual Rate Adjustment
MMO Exhibit 3 - Approved Facilities
MMO Exhibit 4 City Facilites (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 5 City-Sponsored Events (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 6 Transition Plan (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 7 Community Outreach Strategy (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 8 - Diversion Plan
MMO Exhibit 9 Customer Service Plan (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 10 - Collection Services Operations Plan
MMO Exhibit 11 - Contamination Reduction Plan
MMO Exhibit 12 - Vehicle Specifications
MMO Exhibit 13 - Container Specifications
MMO Exhibit 14 - Bulky Goods Collection Service Agreement
MMO Exhibit 15 Memorandum of Understanding (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 16 Local Business Presence and Participation Reporting Form (not yet
available)
MMO Exhibit 16a Local Business Presence and Participation Requirements (not yet
available)
MMO Exhibit 17 Employee and Labor Relations Plan (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 18 - Guaranty Agreement
MMO Exhibit 19 - Business Tax Certificate
MMO Exhibit 20 Residue Tonnage Calculation Methodology (not yet available)
MMO Exhibit 21 EBMUD Letter of June 13, 2014
First Amendment to Mixed Materials and Organics Collection Services Contract (Includes
amended rates)
Residential Recycling Collection Services Contract

RR Exhibit 1 - Maximum Service Rates
RR Exhibit 2 - Annual Rate Adjustments
RR Exhibit 3 - Not Used
RR Exhibit 4 City Facilites
RR Exhibit 5 Transition Plan (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 6 Community Outreach Strategy (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 7 Diversion Recovery Plan
RR Exhibit 8 - Customer Service Plan (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 9 Recycling Collection Service Plan
RR Exhibit 10 - Vehicle Specifications
RR Exhibit 11 - Contamination Reduction Plan

RR Exhibit 12 - Memorandum of Understanding (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 13 - SFD & MFD Dwelling Units (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 14 - Employee and Labor Relations Plan (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 15 Guaranty Agreement (not yet available)
RR Exhibit 16 Business Tax Certificate
Landfill Disposal Services Contract
Disposal Exhibit 1 - Approved Per Ton Disposal Tipping Fees
Disposal Exhibit 2 - Annual Tipping Fee Adjustment
Disposal Exhibit 3 - Guaranty Agreement
Disposal Exhibit 4 - Permits as of Contract Effective Date
Disposal Exhibit 5 - Employee and Labor Relations Plan (not yet available)
Disposal Exhibit 6 - Disposal Facility
Becky Dowdakin
(510) 238-6981 | (510) 238-7286 Fax

From: Levin, Brooke A.

Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 8:08 PM
To: Bolotina, Olga
Cc: Near, Hilary R.; Dowdakin, Becky; Slote, Peter
Olga,
I will have the link sent to you.

Brooke A. Levin
Director
Oakland Public Works
On Oct 21, 2015, at 6:43 PM, "Bolotina, Olga" <OBolotina@oaklandnet.com> wrote:

Hello Brooke,
I hope you had a great time last weekend at the Autumn Lights. I heard it was a lot of
fun.
Would you be able to send us the links to the final garbage contract with all the
relevant addendums. Thank you!
All the very best,
Olga

City of Oakland
Direct: 510-238-7240

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Brian Beveridge
McElhaney, Lynette; Bolotina, Olga; Reid, Larry; Brooks, Desley; Kernighan, Pat; Schaaf, Libby
Recycling contract staff recomendations
Friday, May 23, 2014 5:53:27 PM
Hello All
We have taken a look at the staff report regarding the curbside recycling contract, which is on
the agenda for the next Public Works Committee meeting. We recognize that staff has
pursued the lowest price for the short term, but we very concerned that their recommendations
may be penny wise and pound foolish.
Primary areas of concern are these:
* flexibility afforded to the contractor to change rates, service and recycling targets could
mean rates will rise and waste reduction targets will be missed.
* loss of local jobs to San Leandro and Pleasanton (one bidder has 69% local hire, the
"prefered" bidder only 21%) The local vendor is also committed to using the West Oakland
Jobs Center.
* loss of local government revenues, in local spending and business taxes, to San Leandro and
the Tri-Valley cities.
* contrary to Oakland's local business retention goals (we have a habit of choosing global
corporations over locally grown successful business)
* contrary to the OAB project local hiring goals. (after all, the north gateway is now part of the
project site, though not a CCIG/ProLogis control area)
* loss of local private investment on the order of $20,000,000 - $30,000,000
And, very importantly, the land sale to California Wasted Solutions and CASS metals has
already been calculated into the local match fund for government grants to the OAB
redevelopment project. Where will that match come from now?
Last, but not least, is the City's growing reputation as a place where years of negotiating and
cooperation in good faith by businesses is thrown out in the eleventh hour of deal making.
This proposed contract also cuts the core out of the "Zero Waste" policy. What kind of
message does that send to consumers and how does that impact Oakland's achievement of
state waste reduction mandates?
In a city that desperately needs to be able to point to inspiring, innovative projects, the
combined CWS, CASS, EBMUD, OMSS "eco-park" would be a world-class joint partnership
representing the best thinking in co-generated energy, "green development" and waste stream
reduction. Surely, these factors have a value in the price-per-can cost analysis.
Please take the time to carefully examine the details of the staff report within the greater
context of Oakland's sustainability and resilience vision.
best regards, Brian
-There needs to be understanding that anger never helps to solve a problem. It
destroys our peace of mind and blinds our ability to think clearly. Anger and
attachment are emotions that distort our view of reality. - His Holiness, the Dalai
Lama
BRIAN BEVERIDGE, Co-Director
West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project
1747 14th Street
Oakland, Ca. 94607
510-257-5645
WOEIP.ORG
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
brian.woeip@gmail.com
Bolotina, Olga
Recycling contract
Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:56:55 PM
Hi
Thanks for the info about the third bin and zero waste. We're hoping Dan will favor CWS tomorrow. Their record
on local hiring, their future as part of the Oakland ecopark and their plans to combat illegal dumping make them the
best choice for our community and city.
See you tomorrow.
Brian
T-Mobile. America's First Nationwide 4G Network.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Wald, Zachary
Levin, Brooke A.; Gardner, Henry; McElhaney, Lynette; Bolotina, Olga; Jones, Andre; Ada Chan
Red Line Version of Contract Changes
Monday, September 22, 2014 9:48:52 AM
Henry and Brooke We are having trouble with the zero waste staff report, in that it does not show a red-line where the original contract
language has been changed.
The Councilmembers feel that we need a red-line version in order to make an informed vote this evening.
Can you please make a red-lined contract available?
Thank you,
Zac
Zac Wald
Chief of Staff
City Councilmember Lynette McElhaney
510-238-7033
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Brian Beveridge
Bolotina, Olga
Regarding the recycling vote tonight
Wednesday, July 30, 2014 5:52:36 PM
Dear Dan
We feel that the staff report published as part of the agenda package for the vote tonight failed
to present all of the value items contained in the California Waste Solutions proposal.
We are happy that Council extended the process and assured a level playing field for both
companies. In our discussions with CWS, they have stated their satisfaction with the corrected
process. But as is sometimes the case, it appears that the staff report is incomplete and we
hope that you will consider consider this as you hear the presentations this evening.
Let me say out the outset that we have no financial relationship with either of the competitors
in this bidding process, or with their unions.
The points most important to West Oakland are these:
- for the next few years of their neighborhood operations there will be a net reduction in local
truck trips because private commercial recycling drop-offs will be eliminated at West
Oakland sites,
- all trucks will be converted to natural gas, with one-tenth the pollution and one-third of the
carbon output of gas or diesel,
- the company will move out of the neighborhood (in 2016?) and give up the CUP's and
entitlements to their vacated land, and allow community input on reuse plans.
- CWS has a 68% local hire achievement and a career development partnership with
CivicCorp here in West Oakland. This is a great opportunity to offer young people a career
path in a non-construction growth industry headquartered here in Oakland.
For the city as a whole, the most important element is what CWS calls the "balancing
account." Today only about 20% of the fees paid to cover the Waste Management bulky pickup service actually is used by residents requesting the service. The remaining 80% goes as
added profit to WM. Cal Waste is proposing to redirect that money to a proactive program
that will collect illegal dumping. We don't have to tell you that illegal dumping is one of the
most important issues for the local business community and is seen as a key element of
neighborhood blight.
Prices being equal, we feel that the balancing account and illegal dumping program alone
make the CWS proposal the superior offer.
We understand that staff actually prefers the CWS proposal but is concerned about their ability
to perform as promised. But we also understand that CWS has secured agreements for
vehicles and landfill services that mitigate those concerns.
Lastly, it has not been recognized that CWS will invest nearly $40 million in new facilities at
the OAB. One might look at that investment as a huge rebate of fees for the people of
Oakland. Whatever we pay for their services will be reinvested in our city and help to build
an innovative, state-of-the-art recycling, waste diversion and alternative energy center that
this city can be very proud of.
We hope you will consider these points when you vote this evening.
respectfully, Brian
-"(Community) resilience can be understood as place-based cultural practice that defines how
residents survive in neighborhoods that already look broken, yet function due to existing
social networks, tacit knowledge, and local histories." -Hector Fernando Burga
BRIAN BEVERIDGE, Co-Director
West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project
1747 14th Street
Oakland, Ca. 94607
510-257-5645
WOEIP.ORG
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Amy Willis
Bolotina, Olga; Farmer, Casey; kordaz@oakland
"Agustin Ramirez"; Fred Pecker (fpecker@ilwu6.org); Craig Merrilees
Wage and Rate Increase Information
Thursday, February 27, 2014 12:08:49 PM
Rate Increase Explanation - 2-27-2014.docx
Projected Wage HI and Rate Increases - CWS - 2-27-2014.xls
Oakland Projected Wage Increases and Rate Increases - WM as Franchisee - 2-27-14.xls
Hi, Olga, Casey and Karely,

I've attached a revised memo and spreadsheet explaining the expected rate increases for both WM and CWS.
I did calculations for CWS with 52 and 95 employees and decided against doing them for 110 employees, as we
have no basis for the company's claim that it will have more than double its current number of workers. We actually
don't believe they will even approach 95 since the company has told us they need only about half their current work
force to process Oakland's waste. Even if they get the entire city's waste to process, they should be able to handle it
with their current number of employees.
I've included two spreadsheets, one for CWS and one for WM. The CWS spreadsheet that has four tabs, one each
for wages with 52 workers, health insurance with 52 workers, wages for 95 workers and health insurance with 95
workers.
The wage tabs contain the tables that show the total increase, including wages and health benefits.
The WM spreadsheet is much simpler because WM already provides affordable family health benefits to employees.
I am available all day for questions.
Thanks to you all for all your hard work on this.
A
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Wald, Zachary
Flores, John; HGardner_disabled@oaklandnet.com
McElhaney, Lynette (lmcelhaney@oaklandnet.com); Bolotina, Olga
Zero Waste Contract - Civicorps Issue
Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:50:32 AM
John and Henry
I just met with Alan Lessik of Civicorps, and there is an issue to be addressed.
When Civicorps gave the City their proposal for commercial green waste, their proposed cost did
NOT include the Citys franchise fee.
Now Civicorps is being asked to sign a contract where a pro-rated portion of the franchise fee (about
$1Mill.) is coming out of their contract. Civicorps is unable to sign the contract, because they are
$700,000 short for covering their operating costs.
Civicorps is seeking a waiver or a redirection of the franchise fee back into their training program.
Alan says that this issue must be resolved, and the Civicorps contract signed by March 31st ,
according to the contract that we signed with WMA otherwise, Civicorps is out of the picture.
This situation raises some questions, which you may be able to answer:
1. Is the franchise fee revenue restricted, or does it go into the general fund?
2.
Can the March 31st deadline for the Civicorp contract be extended?
Thank you for your consideration.
Zac
Zachary Wald
510-238-7032
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Bolotina, Olga
McElhaney, Lynette; Farmer, Casey; At Large; Jones, Andre
ZERO waste rules request - Urgent
Thursday, July 24, 2014 9:23:04 AM
RULES Request - approved by Doryanna - please confirm and approve asap :) thank you
TITLE: Resolution directing the City Administrator to Negotiate and Execute a Franchise
Contract with Civicorps in accordance with their Proposal to Collect Commercial Organic
Materials (dated June 25, 2014), and regulating maximum service rates and procedures to
allow for annual adjustment of maxium service rates, and return to Council an Ordinance
awarding a Franchise Contract to Civicorps for the Collection of Commercial Organic Materials
to be Effective July 1, 2015 for a term of ten years.
Olga A. Bolotina
City of Oakland
Direct: 510-238-7240
OAKLAND ZERO WASTE (GARBAGE) SERVICES

Beginning July 1st, our new Zero Waste contracts will kick-in offering new and expanded services
as part of Oakland Recycles collection of garbage, green bin organics and recycling materials for all
residents in our city. There will be some level of rate increase to go along with it. The Council last
year rejected a proposed deal that would have raised rates nearly 50%, opting instead for a strong
package that includes enhanced services along with an approximately 24% rate increase. This
brings our rates on par with many Bay Area jurisdictions.
So, Ive been asked, how did we get to this point?

A few years ago, the City Administration hired a consultant to help develop a Request For Proposal
(RFP) to promote competition and ultimately get a good deal for the citys ratepayers.
Unfortunately, the RFP, which sought bids for three separate contractsMixed Materials &
Organics; Recycling; and Landfill disposalonly attracted two bidders.
Staff reviewed the two bids and sought authority from the City Council in 2013 to use the bids as a
basis for negotiations with both companies to come up with the best deal for the city. We granted
that authority to the Administration. Meanwhile, the City Council developed and further refined a
list of needs, criteria and options that helped guide the Administration as to what the Council
wanted and expected in the final contracts in terms of services to Oakland residents.
After some unexplained delays, in late May 2014, staff presented information and a
recommendation to the Council on the three zero-waste contracts. Their recommendation was to
give all three contracts to one companyWaste Managementcoupled with a rate increase of
nearly 50%. Moreover, this recommendation did not include some of the items and services that
the Council had asked for, or those services were presented with unfavorable prices. However, it
did include a few harmful and ridiculous provisions such as allowing Waste Management to initiate
a lockout of its employees, not to pick up the garbage for several days and not have to pay
liquidated damages to the city.
The Council could not in good conscience accept the recommendation of a 50% rate increase.
Moreover, the staff report making that recommendation did not present a comprehensive applesto-apples comparison of the two negotiated offers from each of the companiesWaste
Management and California Waste Solutions.
At the end of May, 2014, the Council directed staff to go back to both companies and renegotiate a
better deal for the city and its ratepayers, and to come back to the Council with a more thorough
and fair comparison between the offers by the two companies. Council asked staff to make sure
that each company was given a fair opportunity to make a revised offer that allowed us to make an
apples-to-apples comparison.
About two months later, staff returned to the Council with additional information and revised
offers from each of the companies. Staff again recommended that the Council award all three
contracts to Waste Management, even though their proposed rates were higher and some of the
proposed services that the City Council sought were either not included or were more expensive.
I had said from the beginning of this process that I didnt care which company got which contact, as
long as (a) Oakland residents received good service, (b) the environmental and other benefits that
the Council asked for were incorporated into the contracts, and (c) the rate increase was as low as
reasonably possible.
After thoroughly reviewing the negotiated proposals for each of the contracts, the Council decided
to go with the companyCalifornia Waste Solutions (CWS)that provided the lower rates and the
better package of services. CWS is a local company with extensive experience in recycling. They
provided documented back-up plans to ensure they would be fully up and running by July of this
year. The Council approved this package in August 2014 and directed staff to finalize the contracts
and start the process of preparing for the July 1, 2015 transition.
Shortly thereafter, Waste Management decided to file a baseless lawsuit and seek signatures for a
voter referendum. Sadly, many of their paid signature-gatherers misled voters with false messages
of lower rates. Due to the disappointing tactics and delays caused by Waste Management, CWS
faced the risk of losing all three contracts at the ballot box. Waste Managements behavior was
reprehensible, but ultimately we on the Council had to think first about our citys
residents/ratepayers and about making sure services were uninterrupted come July 2015. In
September of last year, CWS agreed to a compromise with Waste Management and city leaders as
follows:
Waste Management would be awarded the Mixed Materials (garbage) and Organics contract and
the Landfill contract, and CA Waste Solutions would be awarded the Recycling Contract for the
entire city. Additionally, Waste Management would have to (a) accept the lower residential rates
that CWS has agreed to, (b) contract out with CivicCorps for much of the commercial organics
collection to provide skilled jobs to young adults, and (c) ensure that all residents have convenient
access to an Organics green bin. We will also receive additional pick-ups of illegally dumped
garbage.
While the process was lengthy, the Councils actions led to what is ultimately a very good deal for
the citys residents. We kept the rate increase to a reasonable amount and we will receive
increased services for our residents.
Starting July 1st, there will be additional services provided due to the new Zero Waste agreements.
For more information, click here.

Kalb Responsive Records Batch 3 PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Kalb Responsive Records Batch 3 PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

From:

Hi CaseyFYI, here are the themes I see for Civicorps:

Not only local jobs, but also:

High social value

Underscored by greater accountability and transparency.

Developing renewable energy, protecting the environment

From: Sherman, Steve [mailto:ssherman@ebmud.com]

Hi CaseyWe appreciate your work and efforts!

Personal opinion not endorsed by my employer: In these arrangements worth approximately $1

Please let me know if youd like to meet,

Developing renewable energy, protecting the environment

Sorry that I havent had a chance to send this sooner.

Thanks for your patience,

Status of EBMUD-WMAC Subcontract Negotiations - April 20, 2015

Background Negotiations are Underway

\\w-fp-ww-1.win.ebmud\data\DATA\NAB\ESD\R2\Reference Library\Waste\0 To Sort\Food\GOVTS\OAK\Zero Waste RFP\EBMUD Fact

Status of EBMUD-WMAC Subcontract Negotiations - April 20, 2015

\\w-fp-ww-1.win.ebmud\data\DATA\NAB\ESD\R2\Reference Library\Waste\0 To Sort\Food\GOVTS\OAK\Zero Waste RFP\EBMUD Fact

Zac and Olga,

Summary of Key Outstanding EBMUD Organics Processing Contract Issues

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

As a public agency, EBMUD cannot accept the

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

EBMUD proposes to provide reasonable notice

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

While EBMUD and its subcontractor will

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

Contamination leads to additional preprocessing costs and degraded digestate

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

LDs should only be imposed on EBMUD to the

LDs should not be assessed in the event that

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

LDs should not be assessed on EBMUD if a load

A meet and confer process and cure period

WM has authority over

MMO should require that the City be

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

EBMUD is in the process of procuring a

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

EBMUD believes the City should not be

The Citys proposed indemnity language is

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

Requirement is a passthrough from the MMO.

MMO should state that the

EBMUD Position on WM Subcontract Terms

Request to City for Mixed Materials &

Requirements are passed

MMO should state that Labor

Include language that explicitly

Dear Ada, Olga, Zac

Section8.TheFranchiseeshalldeliverallcommercialand multi-family sourceseparatedorganicstoEastBayMunicipalUtilityDistrict as

Dear Zac, Olga, Ada, Shereda and Sheng

Developing renewable energy, protecting the environment

Thank you for your interest,

Developing renewable energy, protecting the environment

191 Ridgeway Avenue

From: June Monach <junem@tramutola.com>

191 Ridgeway Avenue

From: Wald, Zachary

Oakland City Councilmember, District 3