Minutes - Board - 2012-04-11•
•
•
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT
MINUTES OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING
APRIL 11, 2012
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
The Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa
Sanitary District met in special session on
April 11, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. at 628 W. 19th
Street, Costa Mesa.
DIRECTORS PRESENT: Robert Ooten, James Ferryman, Jim
Fitzpatrick, Art Perry, Mike Scheafer
STAFF PRESENT: Scott Carroll, General Manager
OTHERS PRESENT: Adam Probolsky, Probolsky Research, LLC,
Justin Wallin, Probolsky Research, LLC,
Debbie Morris, HF &H Consultants, LLC
REVIEW CITIZEN SURVEY QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF THE DISTRICTS ZERO WASTE
PLAN
General Manager Carroll introduced the item and addressed the intent of the survey.
He added that there were 65 questions originally but the survey was narrowed down to
37 questions with the goal of keeping its length to twenty (20) minutes. He reported the
draft survey was submitted to the Recycling Committee, in which one committee
member, CR &R, submitted comments.
Adam Probolsky, Probolsky Research, LLC, reported development of the survey is a
collaborative process, addressed keeping it to a length of twenty minutes (20) and
stated the questions can .be modified, deleted or added as the Board desires.
Each question in the survey was specifically reviewed.
Regarding question number 1, Director Scheafer felt it would be more suitably placed
towards the end of the survey.
Item VII. A. 1.
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 2
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING
HELD APRIL 11, 2012
• Mr. Probolsky explained the rationale for its placement noting it would get people
engaged and will show that waste and recycling are not "top of mind ".
Question number 2 was accepted as is.
Mr. Probolsky reported that question number 3 will be asked according to the relevant
City (Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, and Orange County). He stated it .will provide
preparatory information which will be used as a benchmark against other data. The
information will be across boundaries of the district and will show how people feel about
what's happening in , the community. It will be used as comparable or provide
correlation /causation from an "umbrella" sentiment.
Questions 7 through 10 were accepted as stated.
Regarding question 11, Mr. Probolsky noted it is a follow -up question that will reveal
from those who are not happy with CMSD's service, why they are not happy.
Question 12 was accepted as is.
Question 13 will distinguish between all residents versus most residents. It was noted
that not all multi - family units are serviced by CMSD.
• Director Fitzpatrick expressed concerns about the assumptions relative to the no -bid
contract and use of an anaerobic digester.
President Ooten noted this survey will provide information on zero waste strategies and
has nothing to do with a contract.
Mr. Probolsky reported the goal is to present data as antiseptically as possible and
addressed the possibility of adding a "push" question. In this case, the question is just
presenting facts and that some questions are aimed at presenting arguments. He
stated that several questions are made to determine whether the resident is familiar with
the District.
Discussion followed regarding obtaining comments from those that are familiar with the
District and the possibility of adding or eliminating questions.
Debbie Morris indicated parts of the questions are to gauge the effectiveness of the
District's public education program and stated the importance of getting feedback.
Questions 14 through 26 were accepted as presented.
General Manager Carroll reported that comments received from CR &R recommended
• deleting questions 27 and 28 but that he did not concur.
•
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 3
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING
HELD APRIL 11, 2012
Discussion followed regarding explaining what the Agency does early in the survey. It
was noted that commentary can be added regarding the independent election of Board
Members.
Mr. Probolsky reported there is a great level of appreciation for local government. He
explained the rationale for placement of question 27.
Director Fitzpatrick opined question 27 is a "fluff' piece and felt a question should be
added regarding combining water and trash services for potential significant cost
savings.
President Ooten stated that would be an entirely different survey.
Director Fitzpatrick recommended removing it.
President Ooten didn't agree, stating it provides relevant information.
Mr. Probolsky explained the question is formed as basic as possible to make it
understandable and provided information in basic language.
Question 28 was accepted as is.
Regarding uestions 29 through 32, it was suggested to delete the term "comin lin "
9 9 gg g 9
and replace it with the concept of using a single trash container.
It was noted that question 31 explains the benefits of using a single container.
Regarding questions 33 and 34, Director Fitzpatrick questioned the Board's decision to
stay with one vendor (CR &R).
General Manager Carroll reported the anaerobic digester (AD) is one way to achieve
zero waste.
Director Fitzpatrick felt the Board's decision locked the agency in one, option, that there
are other solutions than the (AD) and that the Board has attempted to deflect any other
option.
Director Ferryman indicated he has no interest in considering any other proposal, that
the CR &R contract is not part of the negotiation and that a lot of the technology is not
understood.
Director Perry agreed there is currently no proposal on the table.
• Director Scheafer indicated he is open to look at other alternatives and suggested
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 4
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING
HELD APRIL 11, 2012
• adding a question asking residents what they know about AD to see if they have a
sense of knowledge as to what is out there in terms of technology.
Discussion followed regarding making the questions general, looking at all alternatives
and engaging the public in dialogue.
It was noted that the thought process was to gauge if residents are willing to increase
diversion by paying extra money to do so. It was noted that residents will not
understand what it takes or what diversion is and determining whether they are willing to
pay for it.
Ensuing discussion pertained to eliminating specific discussions regarding technology
and testing residents' understanding of diversion.
Director Ferryman felt it is important to distinguish what is and what is not mandated.
He added that the State does not require increased diversion.
Mr. Probolsky explained the majority may side with what is more environmentally
friendly.
President Ooten reported he supports planning and exploring alternatives.
Discussion followed regarding exploring alternatives while going through the zero - waste.
planning.
Director Fitzpatrick stated he supports giving notice to CR &R and going out to bid for
services. He added that by doing so, the District can obtain increased diversion with
decreased rates for rate payers. He stated that the District has not explored how
residents can pay less than the current rate.
Director Ferryman explained the $5M in reserves can subsidize any possible rate
increases.
Direction was given to make questions 33 and 34 technology neutral but keep the
information on diversion.
President Ooten declared the only probably mandate is for 75% diversion.
Regarding question 38, Director Fitzpatrick addressed the current no -bid contract with
CR &R.
Director Ferryman stated that thirty (30) cities have similar contracts.
President Ooten felt the issue is not part of a professional survey.
.7
•
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 5
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING
HELD APRIL 11, 2012
Director Fitzpatrick felt previous comments submitted by residents were diminished and
emphasized that the community wants a competitive bid.
President Ooten gave the direction to revise questions 33 -39.
Mr. Probolsky stated that prior questions will consider diversion in general terms and
noted the importance of understanding how residents feel about the possibility of
increased rates.
Director Fitzpatrick felt cost could go lower if the Board decides to consider other
technology and go through an open -bid process.
Ms. Morris explained that usually, cities with zero waste have increased costs.
Ensuing discussion pertained to trying to get a feeling from the community of
environmental awareness rather than whether or not they want to go through a
competitive bid process and the need for in -depth analysis of the later.
Ms. Morris explained the direction given was to develop a survey regarding zero waste
and added that the subject of an open -bid process would be a different project.
altogether.
• General Manager Carroll affirmed the goal is zero waste, not an open -bid process. He
noted the Board's direction was relative to zero waste.
Ms. Morris added that discussion does not involve rates, but rather the importance of
diversion to the community and what they are willing to bear to increase diversion.
President Ooten redirected discussion and reiterated the survey addressed the price for
zero waste strategies. He addressed the complex process of comparing prices and
stated that is not the intent of the survey.
Director Fitzpatrick suggested adding a question to gauge if residents are willing to
increase diversion at decreased rates.
Mr. Probolsky addressed gauging the sensitivity of residents towards zero waste
strategies and noted the goal of obtaining 1,000 complete surveys.
Discussion followed regarding distinct areas in the City and the availability of a map of
the City's areas.
Mr. Probolsky requested a precinct map of the district that identifies the various areas.
General Manager Carroll will follow up with the Registrar's Office.
•
COSTA MESA SANITARY DISTRICT PAGE 6
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS SPECIAL MEETING
HELD APRIL 11, 2012
• Discussion followed regarding times for conducting the survey and Mr. Probolsky
explained calls will generally be made in the evenings and in the '.afternoon on
weekends. He added that cell phones and well as landlines will be called. He stated
the survey will be translated, can be in the field as early as next week and will be
conducted over the course of one week.
is
•
Ensuing discussion pertained 'to variable tiered pricing addressed in question 43 and
landscape /green waste. It was noted that the survey does not specifically address
green waste.
Director Fitzpatrick asked that it be considered organic waste and expressed concerns
about the reliability of the data.
Discussion followed regarding other relevant questions.
Ms. Morris reported that regarding recycling and looking at the population as a whole,
20% are adamant about recycling, 60% are not and 20% are anti - recycling. She
addressed the negative connotation of certain language and stated the goal is to
engage all of the population.
Director Fitzpatrick suggested considering the District in terms of hard assets and
infrastructure.
President Ooten requested framing questions to measure the community's knowledge
and understanding.
Ensuing discussion pertained to self - recycling versus recycling bins, changing people's
behaviors by changing the community norm, re- branding, addressing source reduction
in the survey and hazardous waste and extra actions needed to separate recyclables.
Regarding GPS tracking, President Ooten indicated that is a policy issue.
ADJOURNMENT
President Ooten adjourned the meeting at 11:29 a.m.
Se retary
President