sr-061080-8a_8b_9aCACSSS:LBC:se
Council Meeting June 10, 1980
5an~a Monica, California
J U ~ 1 {1 1980
To: Mayor and City Council
From: City Attorney
Subject: Procedural Aspects of the Proposed Ordinance Repealing
Section 5233A and 5233B of the Santa nionica Municipal
Code and Adding Section 5233 Which Allows Sanitation
Fees to be Set by Resolution.
INTRODUCTION
This report transmits a proposed ordinance in both emergency
and regular forms to allow sanitation service fees to be set by
Resolution. It also transmits two_versions_of a Resolution ao
increase the fees. One version raises the refuse collection rates
l0a due to the higher cost to the City of providing sanitation
service. The other version includes both the loo increase in
cost and street cleaning costs.. Th's version raises the' rates 25%.
ANALYSIS
1. The ordinance is presented in emergency form because projected
City revenues are based on these increased rates commencing at
the beginning of the fiscal year. This will not be possible unless
the emergency ordinance is adopted. If the regular ordinance is
introduced unaccompanied by the emergency ordinance, the new rates
will go into effect July 24 at the earliest.
2. This ordinance has been presented to the Council in a basic
format. If the Council decides to have revenues from parking fines
cover the cost of street cleaning then adoption of. tfie'basid ordinance
and the "10%'" resolution is sufficient.
A~cQt~'~n ~A, (~
qA
3. If the Council decides to include street cleaning in the present
sanitation service rate structure ,-then the draft ordinance must be
amended to say so. A sentence should be added after Section 2(e);
the °25%" Resolution should be adopted together with the amended
ordinance.
4. If the Council decides that street cleaning should not be
included with the refuse rates, but should be billed on another
basis, then the ordinance must be amended to state this fact.
A paragraph should be added as Section 3 which describes the new
system of billing for street cleaning. It should also include
the statement that "minimum monthly fees will be set by City
Council Resolution". These fees can then he set by Resolution at
a subsequent meeting after a billing system is devised. However,
the 10°s Resolution should be adopted with the amended ordinance.
ALTERNATI9ES
The following basic alternatives remain notwithstanding the
street cleaning pro visions or lack of them in the text of the
ordinance:
1. Adopt and introduce the ordinance in both emergency and
regular form repealing outdated refuse fees and allowing new ones
to be set by Resolution. Set new fees by adopting either the
1Q% or 25o P,esolution depending on street cleaning. This will
raise fees to conform to the new budget.
2. Introduce the ordinance in regular form but not in emergency
form and set new fees by Resolution (either 10% or 250) at the
second reading. This will, however, result in a considerable loss
-2-
of revenue to the City because the ordinance will not go .into
effect until the end of July.
3. Enact neither ordinance leaving fees as they are now. The
fees do not cover the cost of the service so this will result in
an even greater loss of revenue to the City.
F,ECOMMENDAT7pN
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council
consider alternative #1 and adopt and introduce the ordinance
in both emergency and regular form. The exact wording of the
ordinance will depend on which street cleaning option has been
chosen. Then,it is recommended that the Council adopt one of the
Resolutions((either 100 or 25s) presented to increase sanitation
service rates.
STEPHEN SHANE STARK
LYN BECKETT CACCIATORE
-3-