12/06/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

` consensus among the task force; LAGCO's compensation package; debris boxes; and hr an alternate rate schedule which included all costs applied to all residents. Jon Angin, General Manager - Los Altos Garbage Company, addressed the issue of the rate increase of 68% which covered the period from March of 1993 to the present. Factors attributing to this request included: economic downturn, increase for ongoing expenses, general administrative expenses, franchise fees and revenue attrition. Mr. Angin recommended looking at the actual increase ($842,000/$894,000) rather than looking at individual line items. Concerning the debris box issue, he noted that the company still had fixed costs relating to debris boxes whether or not they were being used (i.e. lease costs). Concerning general administration expenses, Mr Angin noted that they were based on the revenue generated in Los Altos Hills. Robert Hilton, Managing Partner - Hilton Farnkopf & Hilton, referred to their final report which had been distributed to all interested parties. In response to inquiries made by Council, he suggested the question that should be asked is what the original allocation methodology had been and how it compared to the present. Referring to the allocation issue addressed in their report, it was their recommendation that the Task Force address this issue. Mr. Hilton addressed the issue of compensation and commented on the question under discussion: are the salaries at LAGCO and their parent company NORCAL reasonable? Mr. Hilton reported that five companies in the Bay Area were compared, with workmans' compensation not being included. `, Based on their review, if the ESOP (employee stock ownership plan) was included LAGCO was on the high side; however, if not included, LAGCO was low. Mr. Hilton also commented on the leasing vs. ownership of equipment and the depreciation factor. Peter Hanschen, representing Los Altos Garbage Company, noted that they knew there was a flaw in the allocation formula and they were hoping that the cities and the company could agree on allocations which would be favorable to all. He further noted that the company had entered into this contract with certain expectations. They believed changes were alright if everyone agreed to them and if the company still achieved their expectations. In response to an inquiry from Council that if all the cities agreed to a change in the employee stock ownership plan would LAGCO agree, Mr. Hanschen responded positively. However, he did note that if the Town made a change to the contract then the company would have the option to change it also. Paul Eisenhardt, representing Los Altos Garbage Company, commented on the allocation problem and the option of all the involved cities agreeing on a new allocation method. He stated, however, that the company could not reach an agreement with the Town without the agreement of the other cities. The allocation December 6, 1994 Adjourned Regular Meeting