garbage collection

Supporters of Genesee ARC are planning a rally at 6:15 p.m., Monday, outside Batavia City Hall, to voice support of the agency, which may lose its garbage collection contract with the city.

The city council will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on proposed changes to local laws governing garbage collection.

The changes are necessary to institute an automated tote collection system.

Genesee ARC, which has collected trash in the city for nearly 30 years, submitted the highest bid for the new contract.

From Tom Houseknecht:

There is one major problem with Mr. Molino’s most recent attempt to sell city council and the voters of Batavia on removing garbage collection from the budget and replacing the tax with a user fee. In his comparison of costs, he claims that maintaining the current trash system would require a property tax increase from the current $10.71 to $11.14 per thousand. What he does not tell anyone in this comparison is that this increase cannot happen without a public vote by the citizens of Batavia (with 60% in favor) because of New York’s 2% property tax cap. This means $10.92 is the highest the tax rate can rise to without a vote of the citizens. Many more cuts would be needed in the city budget to keep the taxes under the cap, perhaps including council’s 75% pay increase.

What I feel is happening in this change of trash/recycling collection is this – If Mr. Molino removes the trash process from the budget (effectively lowering the budget by approximately one million dollars) he is able to avoid dealing with a property tax increase of more than 2%. An increase higher than 2% would cause council to put the city’s budget out to public vote. The only other way to keep the tax rate below a 2% increase would be to make big cuts elsewhere. The biggest perceived adverse side affect to this proposal is the impact on the ARC as their collection system, that has served the city well for 28 years, is not geared to the new user fee based system. Therefore, with little time in which to craft their response to the city’s bid specification, the ARC was not the lowest bidder.

With the sideshow of the battle for the ARC and the local jobs they provide, Mr. Molino has attempted to paint his new proposal as an overall savings for the taxpayers. The problem is that we are being misled into thinking that the majority of taxpayers will experience lower costs. The reality is the lowest valued properties will pay an increased amount and the highest valued properties will receive the savings, while the majority of taxpayers will pay more in total.

I now believe that the main reason for this proposal is that it allows for minimal budget cuts, a city council raise and no public vote while passing the bulk of the increase onto the city’s lowest income citizens. When compared to what you paid in 2012, if you are assessed at $60,000, the increase in what you pay out between your taxes and the new user fee at the smallest tote size will be an additional $64 per year, however if you are assessed at $200,000 you will save $183.

Under the proposed plan, everyone assessed below $96,000 will be paying more than they did in 2012. Everyone assessed higher will receive a savings. This break-even point on assessment will move somewhat if a higher tax rate is considered as opposed to the proposed rate with user fee, but should not be compared to a rate that is higher than the city will be allowed to pass without a vote of the citizens.

I’m not disputing the fact that trash collection is an expensive service that needs to be scrutinized as part of the budgeting process. I’m also not opposed to a pay increase for council members. What I take exception to is the ruse that a user fee based system will save the majority of taxpayers money. The “Fact” sheet on the city’s own Web site makes the ludicrous claim that “close to 90% of the city's properties will experience lower costs.” Whether this is a distortion, a misrepresentation, a mistake or a lie, it is far from the truth. If it is true that the average home is assessed at $80,000.00 (as quoted from Mr. Molino’s budget presentation of 1/7/10), the majority of city taxpayers will be paying more. Whether you call it a user fee or a property tax, it is a tax that will impact those who can least afford it the most.

The trash collection/user fee issue is a ruse for the fact that the city is currently proposing an overall budget that will cause them to exceed the 2 percent property tax cap. Their proposed solution puts a greater burden on the city’s lowest income residents, grants council a 75% salary increase and throws one of our finest local human service agencies and their employees under the bus. The plan is being promoted with distortions of fact. All residents need to hold council and the city manager accountable.

As this is my second letter regarding this issue, I again want to state that I appreciate the efforts of our city leaders, especially in these trying economic times. My purpose in writing is not to attack the service of our council members, but to suggest that the facts are being presented in a way that may not be clearly understood by all taxpayers. I am a proponent of the ARC and I believe they are caught in this controversy because of city management’s goal to remove trash collection from the property tax in an effort to avoid a budget battle.

Thomas Houseknecht

Supporters of Genesee ARC packed city council chambers Monday night and encouraged the council to keep jobs local, support workers with disabilities and consider whether a proposed new garbage collection system would really save residents money.

Of the 16 people who spoke, all but about three of them encouraged the council to stick with ARC for garbage collection, whether under the tote system or not. Of the Genesee ARC supporters, about half of them opposed the totes for one reason or another.

"If a business expressed an interest to locate to this area and create 30 new jobs, most areas would offer some kind of incentive to promote them to come to this area and I would hope you would, too," Dave O'Geen said. "Well, we have the opportunity to keep a business with the 30 jobs that the trash and recycling center currently employs."

O'Geen, like every Genesee ARC supporter, received a big round of applause from most of those in attendance. Those who spoke in favor of going to the new system and awarding the bid to the lowest bidder were met with silence.

"Most people I know don’t care who gets the contract as long as it’s the best contract at the lowest price," John Roach said.

The council set a Feb. 11 date for a public hearing on proposed changes to city ordinances to make the new system possible.

Several speakers appealed to the council not to hire an out-of-state contractor.

"Let’s talk about the $450,000 in lost revenue from the people at ARC who will lose their jobs," Carol Grasso said. "Did you ever stop to think that their money is spent right here in our area? Yup, $450,000, I checked it out, that’s their paychecks. They spend it here in the city. It’s like having free trash pick up as far as I’m concerned.

"Some small cities need to stay small," Grasso added. "Let’s do what’s good for Batavia, not some other state."

Tom Houseknecht, a generous financial supporter of Genesee ARC, questioned the dollar-and-cents value of the proposed change in trash collection.

While Houseknecht, who owns commercial property in the city, welcomes a decrease in property tax, he considers the switch to a fee-based system for trash pick-up a "regressive" tax on the city's less well-to-do residents.

"The minimum size tote that will be issued by the city is currently projected to cost a resident $169," Houseknecht said. "With tax rates decreasing $1.56 per thousand, anyone with an assessed value of less than $108,000 will actually be paying more. ...

"If my conclusion is correct," Houseknecht added, "I would ask council to focus on the greater good for the majority of their constituents and not succumb to the lure of lower tax rates that result when refuse is removed from the operating budget."

Paula Fisher (top inset photo) thinks any decrease in the tax rate will be short-lived.

"The levy for trash pick-up in previous budgets was approximately 20 percent," Fisher said. "Our tax rate is going down 14 percent. This tells me our tax rate is going up six. In five years, our tax rate will be right back up there, ARC will be out of the trash business and the bids for trash collection, since they know we don’t have (a) preferred vendor available, will go up."

John Mortollaro said he doesn't really understand the financial implications.

"I still don’t understand how much we’re going to save and how much it’s going to cost," Mortollaro said. "I think this needs to be brought out and explained to the people so they can understand it better."

Kyle Couchman said he's dealt with the kind of proposed plastic totes before, and they don't hold up to Western New York's harsh winters.

Several speakers said older residents will struggle with the totes, Batavia's homes are really too close together to store the totes in a way that isn't unsightly, and that they will be difficult to put by the curb when snow is heavy.

Roach said he has friends and relatives in the garbage collection business in other cities and such concerns are overblown, he said.

"These totes last forever," Roach said. "As for parking and the driveway situation, it's much worse in Kenmore than in Batavia and they don't really have a problem getting them to the end of the driveway. I don’t have a garage and storing them in my backyard isn’t something I’m looking forward to, but it’s not going to be insurmountable either."

Ed DeJaneiro (top photo) said he likes the totes and thinks the new system will encourage recycling. He would just like to see ARC get the contract.

"ARC has always been there for us," DeJaneiro said. "They will continue to be there. I know it’s more money, as proposed, but we’re not sure how much recycling response we’re going to get."

Bottom inset photo: City Historian Larry Barnes listens to the discussion.

The Batavia City Council will discuss a resolution to award a refuse and recycling collection contract to Allied Waste Services at its Monday meeting. A public hearing date has not yet been announced, but there will be one before a vote on the matter Feb. 25.

City staff is recommending Allied as the lowest responsible bidder for the contract.

Allied's bid for the first five years was $4,341,125.

Genesee ARC, which has provided trash service to city residents for nearly 30 years, submitted the highest bid at $5,073,673.

Cascade Engineering has received staff recommendation as the lowest responsible bidder for a supply of wheeled trash and recycling carts to be delivered to residents.

At the Feb. 25 meeting, the council will also need to vote on a resolution amending the local law to make the new tote-based system possible. This resolution likewise will be the subject of a public hearing with the date to be announced beforehand.

Also on this Monday's agenda:

• Councilwoman Rosemary Christian has asked the council to approve a letter supporting a ban on assault rifles;
• There's a request to discuss sidewalk snow removal under Section 159-8 of the municipal code;
• Prospective owners of the former State Police barracks are asking that the property be rezoned, as it once was, to industrial. A purchase offer for the property is contingent on the zoning change. The property is located at 655 W. Main St.;
• The council will be asked to schedule a public hearing on the proposed city budget.

Open Letter:

There has been much misinformation and confusion regarding Genesee ARC and the city’s Trash and Recycling Request for Bids. I am writing to clarify the process from the ARC perspective. The city administration also has information, a perspective, and opinion on this issue. I am speaking on behalf of Genesee ARC to answer some of the many questions that have been posed to me and on the various sites in social media, The Batavian, and The Daily News.

I’d like to preface this letter with the fact that we are a nonprofit organization and we are mission driven, as we should be. Our decisions in every aspect of the work we do are predicated upon doing what is best for the individuals we serve. We have a highly dedicated staff who understand that this is our purpose: “to support people with disabilities, in partnership with their families and the community.  ... and nurture their social, spiritual, physical and emotional growth.”

Genesee ARC began discussions regarding contract renewal with the city administration last summer. The city administration presented a number of new options that they wanted to transition to, including the cart system. This program was something we were asked not to share and we didn’t share, at their request. We voiced our concerns about this change because it would eliminate a number of jobs for the people we support. If we are not providing jobs for people with disabilities we are not following our mission. We also discussed single-stream recycling which would be difficult for us to implement but felt we would need to do if we were to proceed with the contract. We were asked for much information including the financial reports of the program. We complied with the city administration’s request as they said they were entitled to such as they held the contract.

We also discussed that this contract fell under the NYS Finance Law Article XI, Section 161 & 162 4(b)(i), which governs Preferred Source Vendors and Municipalities in NYS. A municipality must work with a Preferred Source Vendor if there is a vendor who can provide the service or commodity. The vendor must provide the service in the “form, function, and utility" as prescribed by the municipality. This is an important point that plays a significant role in the current discussion.

Genesee ARC did share some of our financial information regarding this service with the city administration so that we could develop a program that would fit the city’s needs and requests. After that submission we did not meet again even though we requested additional meetings with the director of Public Works.

On November 6, 2012, NYSID, the organization that facilitates the Preferred Source contracts and Genesee ARC received a request for bid from the City of Batavia. At that time we had 10 days to respond with a letter of intent as required in Section 162 referenced earlier. NYSID did respond on our behalf as required within the required timeframe. A meeting was requested by Genesee ARC and NYSID with city administration which they accommodated on November 14th at which time the city advised that they considered our letter to be insufficient. Subsequently, a second letter was submitted which clearly stated that we would fulfill the contract following the “form, function, and utility.” The city manager asked at the end of our meeting if we (Genesee ARC) could fulfill the contract in “form, function, and utility” and my final answer was “Yes." Subsequently, the city administration claimed we were non-responsive, in spite of the letter from NYSID and my in-person verbal response to the contrary.

On November 29th we received a response from the city administration that they did not recognize our request as a Preferred Source Vendor and had determined that we would not be able to meet the “form, function, and utility” of the request based on previous conversations with Genesee ARC. On that same day, the Request for Bid was submitted to all public bidders and posted on the city’s Web site. Of course we were eligible to submit a bid as well.

We considered filing an Article 78 motion to force recognition of our status but determined that it would not likely be of benefit.

At that time we were determined to participate and compete in the bid process to the best of our ability and try to maintain as many jobs for the people we support as possible.

The public should understand that the tote/cart system was a part of the city's request and unless ARC complied with the critical components of the proposal we could not participate at all. The city does have the right to propose such a program, if the residents disagree with this recommendation they should appeal to their council representatives. The bidders all had access to the provisions of the RFB and needed to submit a proposal that met the requirements or be disqualified.

Genesee ARC followed all the requirements. We consulted with regional experts in the field and submitted what we felt was a competitive bid and one that keep a majority of the people who currently work on the contract employed.

The city requested automated and semi-automated service. The purchase of all new equipment was not within our budget. We could however retrofit two of our trucks and retain the recycling pick up. We were able to work with a company from Chili which would be able to fulfill the trash collection and disposal portion of the contract. Again, this helped us retain jobs for most of the people with disabilities, who were employed on this contract.

We went head-to-head in the competitive marketplace as many have felt should have happened for many years, in spite of our Preferred Source Vendor status as written in NYS law. Although I believe we gave it our best effort, we were competing against national companies who bring all of their considerable resources to the table with them. I liken this to a Big Box store competing against a homegrown Mom-and-Pop grocery mart. The financial position of the bigger companies is hard to overcome.

We provided value-added components that we thought were worthy of consideration, as well as the knowledge that dollars spent with ARC are reinvested locally.

The final decision will be up to the council members. We will accept their decision but hope that they review all proposals fully before rendering that final decision.

There have been a number of questions regarding the financial statements and charts that were in the city manager’s presentation of January 14, 2013. I would ask that the charts from pages 7 and 9 be looked at carefully. The presentation indicates that current city costs are approximately $1,016,034. That may be true, but ARC has been paid only $811,000 for the fifth year of the contract, it was lower each of the previous four years. In fact, this final year of the contract is lower than the contract of 2007, which was $870,707. This shows that the payment to Genesee ARC has decreased over the past five years. The difference between what ARC is paid and the annual cost of the contract could be attributed to the rate that the city negotiated with its vendor for disposal. We do not receive any reimbursement for that portion of the contract. As for the five-year prediction, the city manager will need to provide an explanation for such a dramatic increase as over the past five years ARC has only experienced an average increase in revenue of 2 percent.

Also in clarification to concerns about prevailing wages: Genesee ARC has always paid prevailing wages for any municipal, government or any other contract that has required it, including the contract with the City of Batavia. ARC employees also receive a full benefit package to include health insurance if they so choose.

Regarding wages for other people who work within our vocational program, they receive compensation at various levels that fall within our Special Wage Certificate as granted by the Federal Department of Labor. These wages are carefully monitored not only by DOL but also OPWDD (Office of People with Developmental Disabilities) and NYS DOL.

People who experience disabilities have the highest level of unemployment in the U.S. at approximately 14.4 percent based on the U.S. National Bureau of Statistics. That rises to almost 70 percent for someone with a developmental disability. One of our major initiatives is to access employment in the community for the people we support. This is not an easy task. There are several local companies who have been very supportive of these efforts yet we continue to have many people who remained unemployed or underemployed. Our ultimate goal would be to be able to close our work center because the people we support are employed in the community.

We would be happy to work with any company, agency, or local government entity that would be interested in learning more about providing employment opportunities for the people we serve at Genesee ARC.

In closing, this is a very complex topic. The depth of this issue and implications for all parties involved cannot be summarized in a two-minute interview with a news outlet or conveyed in the back-and-forth of an online news site. The financial implications for the city are significant, as are the impacts to the residents of the city. For those who seek more in-depth information regarding the proposals you can ask to see them at city hall. You can also review the new ordinance that will govern this process. Also you should attend every council meeting and utilize the opportunity they provide to you to express your thoughts and opinions.

Genesee ARC will continue to provide services to the people with developmental disabilities in Genesee County. The loss of this contract will have implications for everyone who works on the contract and our community as well. In the end, whatever the outcome, we will continue to provide whatever supports we can to everyone we serve. It is our mission and this drives our actions and our future endeavors.

Respectfully and proudly submitted,

Donna Saskowski
Executive Director
Genesee ARC

This video apparently produced by the City of Batavia features City Manager Jason Molino, with a cameo by his daughter, demonstrating how the new tote system for trash and recycling will work.

Press release:

On Jan. 14, the city proposed a new Refuse and Recycling Program. The proposed program includes changing to a fully automated variable size cart/tote based collection system offering residents greater capacity for recycling opportunities, while making refuse and recycling more effective and modern.

In addition, the city has proposed funding refuse and recycling through a "Pay-As-You-Throw" system in which residents will pay for refuse collection based on the size cart/tote they select, rather than through property taxes.

All residents are encouraged to watch the presentation of the city’s proposed Refuse & Recycling Program on local Channel 19 – the Community Access Channel -- this Friday, Jan. 18 at 8 p.m. to become more familiar with the proposed Refuse & Recycling Program.

The proposed budget and proposed refuse and recycling information can also be found on the city’s Web site at: www.batavianewyork.com.

Somebody has created a Facebook page called Batavians Want to Keep ARC Trash Collection in an apparent effort to build the necessary political pressure on the Batavia City Council to retain ARC as the company that picks up the city's residential waste.

After nearly 30 years of waste management for the city by ARC, the agency has been required to compete with other companies for the contract, which includes a significant change to how garbage and recycling is handled in Batavia.

The page also contains a link to an online petition for city residents to sign in support of Genesee ARC.

From as many as 10 Genesee ARC employees could lose jobs, including people with disabilities, if the city council awards the bid to another company.

Genesee ARC submitted the highest bid at $4.99 million over five years, compared to the lowest bid, by Arizona-based Allied/Republic at $4.34 million.

The city council will decide which company gets the trash collection contract in February.

Everything you might like to know about the new garbage collection service is contained in documents posted to the city's Web site.

In conjunction with two partners, Genesee ARC submitted a bid to continue providing the City of Batavia garbage and recycling service.

Donna Saskowski, executive director of the ARC, sat through the bid opening at city hall today and characterized her agency's bid as "somewhere in the middle."

But, she said, the city's decision doesn't just come down to price. It's also a matter of being responsive to the bid specifications and she thinks ARC delivers value to the city beyond just price.

"I would hope they could give us a real fair hearing in terms of our value-added items that we will do for the city, keeping people employed here," Saskowski said.

She added that the agency's partners on the project, Boon and Son and Cascade Recovery, also add value to the package; Cascade, in particular, which can sell recyclables anywhere in the world.

"They want a share of that revenue and the city can get more than they ask for if they work with us," Saskowski said.

In the public meeting to open the bids, Director of Public Works Sally Kuzon read each bid for garbage collection and the purchase of totes (two separate bids). A city staff member recorded the bids. When asked for a copy of the record of bids, Kuzon declined to provide a copy to the media.

Saskowski shared ARC's bid, which for refuse collection is $102.97 per parcel per year and $60.13 for recycling. Refuse disposal is $42.50 per ton.

In response to a FOIL request for the rest of the bids, City Clerk Heider Parker said, "This information will be available within 20 business days but I will notify you if it is available sooner."

Deciding to proceed with a bid was a big decision for Genesee ARC, which has provided the city with garbage collection services for 30 years. City officials are seeking to create a new program that is more automated and encourages recycling. ARC is partnering with Boon to provide the trucks necessary for tote pick-ups and with Cascade to help market recyclable material.

"We decided to go ahead because we still have people with disabilities and people in Genesee County who still need jobs here," Saskowski said. "That was my major motivation."

Sean Mason, an environmental sales specialist representing one of the tote manufacturers bidding on the job, Rehrig Pacific, said his company is motivated to help communities improve what they send into the waste stream. Rehrig Pacific has been making totes for 13 years and been in the plastics business for 100 years.

"We're always looking to increase our footprint and to help communities increase their recycling rate and increase the participation per household," Mason said (pictured below with coworker Jason Gimlin).