HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0521.010 2002-2004Harry Kim
Mayor
Barbara Bell
Director
C ann#g Of Anfunli
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMEI-' s
25 Aupuat Street, Room 210 •Hilo, Hawaii 967204252
(808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086 _ - 1--• r -
N
MEMORANDUM
DATE March 12, 2004
TO Aaron S.Y. Chung, Finance Committee Chairman and
all Hawaii County Council ers
FROM Barbara Bell, Director{)
SUBJECT : Department of Envirdnmental Management Operating Budget, FY 04-05
I hope the following will answer most of your questions and address your concerns as
outlined in the letter from the Legislative Auditor, Deputy County Clerk and staff. We
can elaborate at our Finance Committee review on Friday, March 12, 2004. For further
clarification we can provide responses in writing at a later date.
ADMINISTRATIVE
PAGE 1
DEPARTMENT GOALS
3. To maximize convenience to the public.
To clarify, maximizing convenience to the public involves several goals, including:
1) Maintenance and enhancement of existing services.
2) Construction of new facilities to serve changes in population.
3) Public education.
5. To utilize the best available technology to minimize waste volume and/or tonnage.
6. Perhaps language should acknowledge financial impacts as maximum convenience and
best available technology will come with exorbitant costs.
It is our understanding that costs is a large part of the definition of "best available
technology ". We could change the wording to "best available technology in tandem with
good value for the County's residents ". Utilization of the best available waste reduction
technology will likely involve substantial costs. These costs are currently unknown and
Comm. No. �t�•�O
Ref. To: Pteste�
Ref. Date MAR 12 2004
70
can only be estimated. It will be reasonable to expect that any available waste reduction
technology, with all present economic and compliance factors staying the same, deemed
by the County to be superior than others will be more expensive than hauling waste from
East Hawai'i to West Hawaii. It will also be reasonable to expect it will be likely less
expensive than developing and operating a new landfill in Hilo.
7. To dispose of abandoned vehicles left on County roads within one week.
8. To eliminate the backlog of the Vehicle Disposal Program by January 2005 in Kona
and by January 2007 in Hilo.
1. These seem to be objectives
Goals and objectives are synonymous. These goals can be viewed as objectives because
they provide a measuring stick for determining the success of the Program and an
indicator for remediating Program deficiencies.
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
2. Maintain Sewer fees at a level to cover expenses of operations, repairs and
maintenance and replacements.
1. What percent of expenses does this cover? What other expenses would still remain?
This covers all expenses except the debt service on capital improvement projects. CIP
debt is estimated to be about 30% of the expenses of a wastewater system.
3. Maintain fee system to assure financial self-sufficiency for vehicle recycling and all
recycling programs.
1. Where will fees come from?
Fees to support vehicle recycling are currently collected on the vehicle registration by
Motor Vehicle Department. There is a State Advanced Disposal Fee (ADF) on glass and
fees are passed over to the County as a grant to provide incentives to recycle glass. The
State funds the Used Residential Motor Oil, a program likely to continue.
The State's Beverage Container Deposit law will be implemented in 2005. It sets an
advanced collection system to cover the redeemable deposit and handling fees. DOH
indicates that funds will be made available to assist the County in establishing
redemption centers and the State may assign and fund a position in each County to
provide administrative assistance for the beverage container deposit law.
DEM recommends that, with the implementation of an Organics Diversion program and
production of certified compost, commercial haulers be charged a greenwaste tip fee.
That tip fee could be set as a small percentage (15%-2501o) of the landfill tip fee to
encourage diversion and offset risingprogram costs resultingfrom increasing quantities
ofgreenwaste.
Legislation has been proposed at the State this year to initiate an Advanced Disposal Fee
for vehicles. Although the ADFfor vehicles may not pass this year, there is increasing
support at the legislature to enact advanced disposal fees for vehicles, bulky goods, white
goods and other consumer goods that can be recycled or diverted from landfill. When,
and if, ADF legislation passes for specific types ofgoods, the County will receive some
proportion of the funds.
2. Will fees be used for County of Hawai'i recycling programs?
Yes. Any fees that are collected will be revenue posted against recycling program
expenses. Fees can be used to provide financial incentives to direct more tonnage into
recycling markets, especially items that have either weak or volatile markets such as e -
waste (computers etc.), plastics, paper fibers, and cooking oil. We currently offer
diversion grants of $40/ton to create incentives for recycling vendors to collect and
recycle paper fibers and cooking oil. The cooking oil is enhanced into an alternative
fuel. At the price of $40/1on, the County has full participation in the Diversion Grant
program. The level offunding that was budgeted by the County ($160,000/year) for the
past year has been insufficient to deal with the rising quantity of these recyclables being
produced by our community. At $40/ton, recycling is a less expensive disposal method
than landfilling or than our commercial tip fee.
For "Recycling Division"?
Yes. Iffees collected through advance disposal fees by the State are provided to the
County and can be expended on administrative costs, it is possible that future positions
established within a "recycling division" would be funded through fees.
For external recycling businesses?
Fees collected will be used to provide financial incentives to recycle the more difficult to
recycle goods where recycling incurs high transportation costs. External recycling
businesses will be contracted through our existing diversion grants program.
PAGE
6. Reduce days, and percentage of balances over 90 days past due, in Accounts
Receivable for Wastewater and Solid Waste services by 5% for FY 2004-2005.
1. This can be accomplished simply by writing off bad debts over 90 days old.
Improving collections is preferred.
Improving collections is always the goal. Reducing the days and percentage of balances
over 90 days past due are indications of improved collections. Hawaii County Code
Section 2-108 and 2-109 addresses uncollectible accounts and requires that Corporation
Counsel finds the debt to be uncollectible before the account can be written off So debts
over 90 days old cannot be simply written off to reduce the days and percentages of
balances over 90 days.
PROGRAM MEASURES
Tipping fees as a % of Solid Waste Fund expenditures
Unsure whether this is necessarily a good measure.
It is intended to correlate to General Fund subsidy of the Solid Waste Fund. Presently the
Solid Waste expenditures are heavily funded by the General Fund.
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES:
5671.01-021 Salaries and Wages
Please justify the increase in positions in Environmental Management -Administration
from 5 to 16 positions in 04-05.
The Administrative Section of the department is being reorganized in FY 04-05. The
reorganization will involve creating two new sections. There will be a Technical Services
Section that will supervise construction inspection and projects. The second new section
—Business Services will include Personnel and Accounting functions. The existing seven
accounting staff and two part time student workers from Solid Waste and Wastewater will
be consolidated into a Business Services Section. A position transferred from Public
Works will also provide support to the Personnel and Accounting Units.
Below is an overview of the positions that will be in Administration:
Directors's Office (3)
Director (existing)
Deputy Director (existing)
Secretary to the Director (existing)
Technical Services Section (2)
Technical Services Chief (new)
Construction Inspecctor (new)
Business Services Section (11)
Accountant III (existing)
Personnnel Management Specialist H (existing)
Administrative Services Assistant (transferred from Public Works)
Accountant I (2 existing)
Senior Account Clerk (3 existing)
Account Clerk (2 existing)
Student Helper (2 existing `/z time positions)
PAGE
Janitorial Services; Water, Gas, and Sewer; and Electricity accounts
We will be taking these utilities out of our budget, as directed by Finance and/or Building
Division. We now believe we will be in the original County Building for the foreseeable
future.
PAGE 4
1. 30,000 Moving Expenses: When is department planning to move?
We have been planning to move since early 2003. Changes in other Department's needs
have impacted the Department of Environmental Management's timeline. We are now
scheduled to use the old Department of Public Works space in the original County
Building. We are awaiting repair of the roof, with the added asbestos issues, before we
can consolidate our Divisions with the administrative staff.
5671.02-225 Educ-Recr-Scientif Supp — No expenses through 1/31/04. Indicates that
account may not be necessary.
This budget is for reference materials that are not necessarily purchased on a regular
basis. We have included a modest budget of $500 for when the need arises.
5671.02-340 Employee Awards — No expenses through 1/31/04. Indicates that account
may not be necessary.
The Department's current administrative staff is all fairly new and have not received any
awards to date. Our budget request of $1,500 reflects the transfer of accounting
positions from the Solid Waste and Wastewater Divisions to the Departments
Administrative staff.
PAGE 5
5671.02-341 Misc. Charges
What does PW Admin charges and PW Bldg. Div. Chgs cover? Are these monies
funneled from various funds?
Public Works Admin charges cover their costs for providing our department with
administrative services such as accounts payable. Public works continues to assist our
department with various fiscal duties as we do not yet have sufficient staffing levels to
take over all of the responsibilities. The Public Works Building Division Charges will
cover maintenance costs for our new office when we move.
2. Are other departments being charged for the services of the Building Division?
To the best of our knowledge, only the special fund departments and divisions are being
charged for the services of the Building Division.
5671.06-450 Office Equip-Fixt-Furn — For moving expenses?
No. These items are neededfor additional staff, transfer offiles from Public Works, and
furnishing our office (old or new). Since the Department was created, very little furniture
has been purchased. We use left over furniture from other departments whenever
possible, but still need these additional items.
SOLID WASTE FUND
PAGE
Is Net Landfill Fees Receivable decreasing?
No, however our collections have improved. The net landfill fees receivable has
actually increased due to higher revenues being generated as a result of the tipping
fee increase on July 1, 2003 and increased volumes. At June 30, 2003, accounts over
90 days past due made up 36% of the receivables balance. As of January 31, 2004,
these accounts have been reduced to 26% of the receivables balance. Another
indicator of our improved collections in Solid Waste is the average number of days in
accounts receivable, which was 118 days in FY02-03 and is down to 85 days as of
January 31, 2004. That's a 28% decrease to date for FY03-04.
2. What portion of the decrease in doubtful accounts ($516,610.25 to $351,034.09) can
be attributed to write-offs? To Collections?
Approximately $50,000 of the $165,576.16 decrease can be attributed to write-offs,
the remainder would be due to collections.
What is the status of the comprehensive collections policy? What is being done to
better manage receivables and to collect on outstanding debt?
A collection committee meets on a monthly basis and includes stafffrom our
Department, our Divisions, Public Works, Finance, and Corporation Counsel. The
committee reviews the status of the larger delinquent accounts, discusses actions to
be taken, and considers new policies that may be implemented to improve collections.
The committee's priorities have been to work on collection of specific accounts and to
work on ways to reduce the occurrence of unpaid receivables. Therefore the
comprehensive collections policy is not yet completed.
Some changes that have had a significant impact on our collections have been:
- Ordinance No. 03-102 which amended, among other things, the requirements
for claiming the residential credits. In order to receive the credit, the haulers
account is now required to be current. Several accounts were brought current
due to this requirement.
- A special provision was added to the bid for rubbish removal services for
various agencies of the County. This provision allows us to apply the payment
owed to the debtor for their rubbish removal services to their tipping fee account
if their account is not current. This has brought another significant account
current.
Another change that we hope will have a significant impact is a new collections
contract, which was awarded in January. The collections contract was put out to bid
and resulted in a contract with a new collection agency at a fat commission rate of
15%, compared to the previous commission rate of 27%for Solid Waste.
Other changes being considered are adding a provision, similar to that for the
rubbish removal services, to all County contracts so that any vendor having any
delinquent account with the County shall have payments due from the County applied
to their account until it becomes current. We are also looking at amending the
County Code to shorten the delinquency periods so that we don't have to wait until an
account is 60 days past due to start charging interest or to deny access to the landfill.
When an account becomes past due, the debtor will receive a past due notice. If the
account remains delinquent, the debtor will receive a final notice stating that if
payment is not received by a specified date, the account will be referred for
collections. Accounts over 90 days past due are referred to the Office of Corporation
Counsel, if the balance is over $1,000. Corporation Counsel will then determine the
best course of action. This may be reaching a payment plan agreement with the
debtor, filing for a judgment against the debtor, or possibly writing off the account if
they determine that it is uncollectible (such as a deceased debtor with no estate).
Corporation Counsel also has a new paralegal assigned to collections, which is an
added resource that is really helping to move the collection efforts forward.
Delinquent accounts under $1,000 are referred to a collection agency, where one of
the contract requirements is that the delinquent balances be reported to the Credit
Bureaus. From the time the account becomes past due until it is referred for
collections, the SWD staff responsible for billing is pursuing collection on these
accounts. This includes phone calls and follow up calls to the debtor, which have had
some very positive results.
4. What is the nature (profile) of the debtors (commercial, single residential, size of
business, credit reports)?
The debtors are generally commercial accounts. The businesses vary in size.
5. What is our procedure for credit checks?
We do not currently conduct credit checks. This has been considered as a new policy
that could be implemented. However, we do not currently have the resources to
conduct the credit checks and there is a greater concern with the potential effect on
illegal dumping.
6. Do we continue to allow debtors to dispose?
Debtors are denied access when their account becomes 90 days past due.
7. Do we charge interest and penalties?
We charge interest at a rate of 18% per annum on accounts over 60 days past due, as
specified in the Hawaii County Code. The Code would need to be amended to charge
penalties.
PAGE
General Fund Subsidy versus Tipping Fees
1. Are there any alternative revenue sources?
We are always looking for potential grant revenues however, as was mentioned, we
cannot count on this as a significant source in the near f Lure. One potential source
that is being considered is to establish a tipping fee for greenwaste. The fee would be
a reduced rate from the landfill tipping fees and would help to offset the costs of an
organics diversion contract.
Obviously, the greatest potential revenue source would be to start charging residents
for disposal fees. One thought on this would be to carve this out on the property tax
bills so that the Solid Waste Fund receives a specified portion of the property taxes.
This assessment rate could then be adjusted as needed specifically for the needs of
managing solid waste and would then create a self-suficient fund. As it stands now,
the costs for handling residential waste are subsidized by the General Fund, which is
mostly funded by property taxes but the allocation to the appropriate Departments
and Divisions is subject to the relative needs of each in any given year. Another
possibilityfor charging residents would be a pay as you throw, or volume -based
disposal system, which would likely require additional resources to implement.
2. Will both General Fund Subsidy and Tipping Fees/Landfill Permit Fees continue its
upward trend? If so, what expenditures may be causing this trend?
Tipping Fees Revenues will continue the upward trend through FY07-08, when the tip
fee rate reaches $85 per ton. After that, they should level off quite a bit, with
remaining f uctuations due to the volumes of tonnage being received. Landfill Permit
Fees will likely remain fairly fat. The General Fund Subsidy will likely continue
upward for the next couple of years and then should level off. The reason Tipping
Fees Revenues and General Fund Subsidy are both in an upward trend right now is
due to increased expenditures for: increased tonnage of waste; compliance issues;
necessary repairs and replacements; security guard costs; airspace conservation;
and a few enhanced services. The trend will continue upward for the next couple of
years when the Hilo Landfill is closed and we transition to long hauling or an
alternative disposal technology. When that transition has taken place, the rate of
increase should be significantly reduced.
3. How will or how has the extension of life of the L/F affected the GF Subsidy? Will
there be some kind of deferral for the need of GF Subsidy?
The extension of the life of the South Hilo landfill defers some of the needs for the GF
subsidy, but not all. Increased maintenance and surveying is required to keep the
landfill in compliance as we continue operations. When that landfill does close, long
hauling as needed will increase the need for GF subsidy.
PAGE 5
Grant Revenues
What is the status of the final report for Used Oil Collection/Disposal Grant for FY
2001-2002?
It was submitted in July 2002. Report available at our office. (about 10 pages)
2. What is the status of the final report for Glass Recycling Program and Used Oil
Collection/Disposal for FY 2002-2003?
They were both submitted in July 2003 and are available at our office. (each about 10
pages)
PAGE
1. A review of OT may answer questions such as:
➢ Was increase in overtime unavoidable and mostly due to:
• Emergencies?
• Specialized work?
• Vacancies?
Holiday pay is a large part of overtime as the Division operates 365 days a year.
Employees earning holiday pay at overtime rates, because they have to work on the
holidays, make up approximately half of the FY02-03 overtime costs.
Vacancies, absences, and emergencies caused the other half of the FY02-03 overtime
costs. During FY02-03, there was an average of 5 vacancies throughout the year. When
an employee calls in sick or takes emergency leave, other staff is called in to work
overtime to make certain services to the public continue and that the refuse locations are
accessible to the public. Some of the overtime is due to emergencies such as suppressing
afire at the Kona scrap metal yard and fire damage to various transfer station sites and
trailers.
➢ Number of employees receiving OT?
Approximately 54
➢ Average OT amount?
The average overtime per employee would be about $5,200
➢ Are we at a level where a greater effort should be made to fill vacancies or use
independent contractors?
The non -appointed positions in the department are represented by Union organizations -
UPW and HGEA. Contracting for the work performed by these positions could cost the
County considerable legal fees as the Unions could litigate the loss ofpositions. Also,
contracted services are usually for a limited amount of time and the positions that were
vacant perform ongoing duties.
A sustained effort has been, and continues to be, made to fill vacancies. The Department
hired a Personnel Management Specialist in October 2002. Retirements and injuries
with extended absences complicate the situation. Since our Personnel Management
Specialist has been on board, we have made substantial process. When she started, we
had I1 de facto vacancies out of 59 positions. Only 4 were permanent vacant positions,
the other 7 were out due to industrial injuries. At one point in 2003 we had 17 de facto
vacancies. This was 28.9% of our workforce! Since then we have hired 11 individuals,
including our Division Chief, and next-in-charge Superintendent. Morale has and
continues to improve. Presently we have 4 permanent vacancies and 3 workers
compensation vacancies.
A registration list to select Transfer Station Attendants makes it possible to select and
hire such vacant positions within four to eight weeks. Recruitments for Equipment
Operator and Supervisor 1 require about three months to recruit and select a candidate.
The timeline for selection becomes extended when the position descriptions have not been
updated within the last five years. In such situations the recruitment process can be
lengthened by another two months for Civil Service to review and approve the updated
position description. Each position has its own position description that requires review
and updating.
Efforts are underway to create position descriptions by classification instead of by
individual position.
The Department is revising its recruitment policy to extend the period of time applicant
interviews are valid. This will reduce the number of selection interviews that will have to
be conducted for current and future vacancies. Finally, the department will be
conducting more internal department recruitments in an effort to motivate existing
employees to remain within the department.
PAGE 7
1. What is the cause of the steep decrease in R&M equipment funds?
2. How does this account correlate with the CIP request for Equipment Maintenance
Facility for DEM?
(I & 2) The decrease in R&M equipment funds refiects construction and operation of the
Department's Equipment Maintenance Facility in FY2005-2006.
PAGE 8
1. Why do we have to pay DOH Disposal Fees? Is it possible to get a statutory
exemption?
In 1997, the Hawaii State Legislature established a surcharge of $0.35/ton of solid waste
disposed of within the State. This action requires that the person or entity doing the
disposal pay the surcharge. The County of Hawai 'i submits payment of these fees to
DOH on a quarterly basis.
The State Legislature is the only governing body with authority to grant a statutory
exemption. Presently, Hawaii Revised Statutes does not provide for a mechanism to
acquire a surcharge exemption.
2. What was the conclusion of the Residential Credit Audit?
a
The Residential Credit Audit has not been conducted yet. It is expected to begin later this
month and be completed by the end of the fiscal year. Since the requirements for the
Residential Credits changed on July 1, 2003, we felt it was best to wait until we had
several months of data to sample. You will notice that no funds have been budgeted for
this for FY04-05, this is because the audits will be conducted in house by departmental
staff.
PAGE 9
3. How much longer will Waimea & Kailua Post Closure need to be budgeted? Is it
really needed? ($100,000 was transferred to Green Waste Program in FYE 2003)
State and Federal regulations require that all owners of solid waste disposal facilities
provide financial assurance for post -closure care throughout the entire period in which
the solid waste disposal facilities pose a threat to public health and safety and the
environment. The Waimea and Kailua Landfills will require ongoing maintenance and
monitoring as long as the disposed waste remains at these sites.
The Waimea and Kailua Landfills contain undocumented waste. Additionally, both
landfills were operated in a manner inconsistent with current solid waste management
practices. Both landfills are currently experiencing subsurface fires. Failure to
responsibly maintain and monitor these facilities will result in negative impacts to public
health and safety and the environment.
4. Are we still having problems with Kailua L/F Fires? Is there a permanent solution
that may cost more now, but is most effective in the long run? When will Kailua
Landfill fire be under control? ($150,000)?
Refer to Response above. The proximity of the landfill to the Kona Police Station is a
significant concern. Kailua Landfill gas emissions and odors emanating from the
County's Kailua Green Waste Site remain a serious nuisance for Station employees.
Permanent solutions are debatable. The only truly permanent solution would be to
remove the waste from the landfill and dispose of it elsewhere. Presently that would mean
transporting it to the West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill. The estimated cost for re -locating
the landfill's waste and remediation of the site ranges between 10-50 million dollars.
These costs cannot truly be estimated given the fact that the landfill contains
undocumented waste.
The Kailua Landfill fires are currently under control in that the County performs regular
monitoring and maintenance of the landfill. Limited fire suppression activities are
ongoing. These efforts have resulted in variable success rates. There are no guarantees
that the landfill fires can be truly extinguished.
1. Is Cover Material adequately funded so CoH is not cited again?
Last year, the Solid Waste Division performed an estimate of the amount offunding
necessary to provide sufficient quantities of cover material to achieve and maintain
compliance with applicable State and Federal regulations. The estimate was based on
regulatory compliance requirements, existing site conditions and a reasonable estimate
of quantities of waste received at the landfill through June 2004. The estimate did not
include cover material costs associated with significant increases in waste received at the
landfill (i.e. disaster debris, large-scale commercial development projects, or other
unanticipated disposal impacts).
2. Are there additional fines and penalties we need to be aware of?
Fines and penalties are assessed at the discretion of the governing regulatory agency.
The County of Hawaii has entered into a Consent Agreement with DOH to address
(among other things), deficiencies in the amount of cover material previously used at the
South Hilo Sanitary Landfill. The associated Consent Agreement penalty resulted in the
County paying $43,08 7.50 to DOH as well as funding solid waste related programs that
we would otherwise not have done. In working with DOH, we chose to support backyard
composting workshops, as this is a great way to keep organic materials from ever seeing
our facilities.
PAGE 10
1. Departmental Admin Fees
➢ What does Departmental Admin Fees cover (Revenue Acct. 3401.46)?
The Departmental Admin Fees cover all the costs of running the department, including
salaries and wages for the Department's Administrative staff, supplies, telephone,
equipment, etc. The costs incurred by the Department's Administrative staff are charged
back to the special funds that it administers.
➢ Why was there a 41.14% increase ($145,796 in FYE 2002 to $205,780 in FYE
2003)?
In FYE 2002, there were only two positions established for this new Department, a
Director and a Private Secretary. In FYE 2003, two more positions were added, a
Personnel Management Specialist and an Accountant III. The Department is still
working towards establishing the necessary staff to effectively administer the department
so this trend should continue.
➢ Why is the administration of the Solid Waste Fund almost 50% more costly than for
the Sewer Fund?
The Department's Administrative costs are allocated to the special funds based on three
factors, the size of their budget (expenditures), the number of employees, and the
receivables (billings) workload. The Solid Waste Fund has the largest budget, which
would presumably require more administrative oversight and payables processing. The
Solid Waste Fund also has the largest number of employees, which would imply that
more administrative time would be required to address personnel issues and process
payroll. The receivables workload is actually greater for the Sewer Fund due to a more
complicated billing process and much higher volume of accounts, the allocation does
take that into account. Different methods of allocation can be considered, we just felt
12
that this method would be the most fair representation of the actual administrative
services being provided to each of the special funds.
PAGE 11
5604.06-456: Construction & Repair Equipment is a new account for which over '/2 of
the fiscal year has gone by with no expenditures.
1. Is this account really necessary?
Yes. This account is not necessarily a "new" account, but for the previous three years
nothing was budgeted or spent through this account. This was due to lack offunds. The
equipment being requested for FY04-05 is necessaryfor the operation of the Sort Station
and to maintain our equipment. On Table 8, you noted that the final budget was less than
the original proposal, the items that were cut are the water tanker and riding lawn
mower. This is why the water tanker is again being requested for FY04-05.
The reason you see no expenditures to date this fiscal year is that these items are
considered heavy equipment and go out on a County -wide bid once a year. The bid
results are presently being reviewed and will likely be awarded very soon. Once the bids
are awarded, it generally takes the vendor a few months to deliver. Any heavy equipment
that is budgeted, County -wide, is generally not received until late in the fiscal year.
Funds for this FY03-04 equipment will likely be encumbered this month. We received
bids today. It appears there may be $10, 000 left unencumbered.
2. Were there or will there be any transfers from this account?
Yes, there were funds transferred from this account in FIT 2004. We re-evaluated our
need for a 10 CYdump truck and determined that we only needed an 8 CYdump truck.
We then used this savings to fund an additional Equipment Operator III position. There
could be another transfer from this account since the budget for a water tanker was cut to
$9,584, we won't be able to purchase that this year.
3. Does the equipment purchased correlate with the proposed $7.775 million Eqmt
Maintenance Facility?
The welding truck and welding machines will become part of the Equipment Maintenance
Facility.
PAGE 12
1. Green Waste renamed to Organic Waste? If so, funding to it increased by 73%.
The term Organics Diversion encompasses greenwaste plus other organic materials that
can be diverted from landfills through a composting technology. The County has been
conducting greenwaste diversion as required by State DOH Administrative Rules for
solid waste landfill operations since 1995. The amount ofgreenwaste recovered through
this program has grown at an average of 29% per year since 1999 when the service was
expanded to both sides of the island. Under the greenwaste diversion program,
13
unprocessed clippings, prunings and leaves can be dropped for free by both residential
and commercial customers at either the Kailua or Hilo transfer stations. The County's
vendor shreds the material. The shreds/mulch is made available to the public for free.
In 2003, DEMpublished an RFP to initiate an Organics Diversion program. Vendors
were asked to submit proposals to develop a value-added US Composting Council
certified compost product from greenwaste and some combination of "optional" organic
waste as proposed by the vendor. Optional materials could be untreated lumber, food
waste, gypsum, cooking oil, and biosolids. Until proposals were received and opened in
June 2003, DEM could not begin to estimate the costs that would be associated with
actual composting and additional diversion of organic portions of the waste stream.
The increase of 73% in our funding request for FY 2004-05 for what is now being
referred to as Organics Diversion is required because:
• The budget established for FY 2003-04 of $600, 000 to process greenwaste is
insufficient to cover the processing of the estimated 17,600 tons of new material that
will be dropped at the two processing sites during this fiscal year. There was a
backlog of unprocessed greenwaste at the beginning of this fiscal year, due to
insuficient funding for the previous year's greenwaste program. As the funding is
again insufficient for FY2003-04, the backlog of unprocessed greenwaste continues
to grow and we estimate having 6, 000 tons of backlogged unprocessed greenwaste at
the end ofFY2004-05. Under the current contractual terms (for mulching only) of
$35/ton, it will require an additional $210,000 to process this excess material. If the
greenwaste being diverted continues to grow at its historic rate of 29%, we can
anticipate that 22,000 tons will be dropped at the greenwaste receiving sites in FY
2004-05.
• We anticipate the cost per ton ofgreenwaste will increase under an Organics
Diversion because the additional costs of diverting other types of organic materials
(referred to above as Optionals) as well as the extra production costs of producing a
certified compost product are rolled into the cost per ton offnished certified
compost. We anticipate that for every ton ofgreenwaste diverted under an Organics
Diversion contract, we will have the benefit of an additional 400 pounds of optional
organic materials will also be diverted from landfilling. We anticipate the cost per
ton will rise to $45 per ton diverted from landfill. This is less expensive than
landfilling and meets our diversion goals. At that price, processing 22, 000 tons of
processed greenwaste will cost $990, 000.
• Combining the costs of an Organics Diversion program that will increase total
tonnage diverted from landfill to 26,400 tons, and the cost of eliminating the current
backlog of unprocessed greenwaste under the existing contract, the total request for
FY2004-05 was originally $210,000 + $990,000 = $1,200,000. We have reduced
that request to $1,035,000 as we will continue the existing program for approximately
6 months into the next fiscal year before initiating the Organics Diversion program.
2. Volume of Refuse from Communication 511 does not reconcile to volumes in budget.
The spreadsheet in Communication 511 was updated in February, 2004, after the budget
was prepared. It refects the most accurate data we have. The volume of refuse estimated
for Communication 511 to incorporate revised data from previous fiscal years and
actuals for FY 2002-03, was based on the historic increases observed in the decade from
14
1994 through 2003. The annual rate of increase in the waste tonnage averaged 4%. A
comparison of total tonnage landfilled in the first six months of FY 2003-04 with the total
tonnage from the same period for the previous fiscal year indicates the waste stream is
increasing at an annual rate of 8.2%. The attached graph shows the projections on the
waste stream through year 2020. One is based on an annual 4% increase wherein the
amount of rubbish generated on the island will double from 2003 levels by year 2019. If
the waste stream continues to grow at an annual rate of 8.2% the island's waste stream
will double by 2012. We plan on introducing measures and programs to reduce the rate
ofgrowth in our waste stream.
Is funding for recycling programs effectively slowing the growth of or decreasing
volume?
Fundingfor diversion/recycling programs will effectively reduce the amount of waste
being landfilled. The attached summary report for midyear FY2003-04 shows that our
diversion rate has increased from 15.1% in FY2002-03 to nearly 18%. This is due to
funding increased recycling options for the public and better management of existing
programs through the hiring of a Recycling Coordinator, a position that had not been
filled since 1992. Increased expenditures on diversion funds, which encourage both
residential and commercial sector recycling, as well as increased expenditures on
recycling education and outreach, will cause the diversion rate to continue to increase.
With assistance through grants from the EPA and the Community Block Development
Grant, we will be working on more transfer station enhancements to provide more
opportunities to the public to recycle. The attached PowerPoint slide gives a snapshot on
how our island's diversion rate will increase from the 2003 benchmark of 15% to 45% by
year 2008. The attached transfer station enhancement plan shows the priority system
developed to select transfer stations for enhancements and the funding sources to provide
the improvements.
4. With expectations of increased funding for recycling programs, is a new division
being considered?
This could be a next step. The recycling programs in the City and County of Honolulu
have grown so much under the direction of Suzanne Jones who began as their Recycling
Coordinator in 1990 that a new branch was created in the last two years to handle the
programs. There are 6-7 staff members working under this branch at this time and more
positions are being requested for the upcoming year. Maui County has staff to assist
their Recycling Coordinator and we have copies of the job descriptions from these other
counties. If we are to achieve our goal of 80% diversion from landfill by year 2014, we
need to consider first providing staff and then consider the need for a separate branch or
division.
1. Why is CPI Adjustment so high?
The rate we pay to Waste Management is adjusted annually effective each January P,
according to the Consumer Price Index. Based on the CPI for the first half of 2003, we
estimated that the CPI adjustment would be slightly over 3%, the CPI released the end of
Februaryfor 2003 reflects an increase of 2.94%. In the previous three years, the highest
15
it has been was 1.67%. The higher CPI adjustment is a result of both the high inflation
rate and increased volume of trash being handled at the landfill.
2. What is involved with Litter Picking now that was not being done before?
Litter collection at the West Hawai'i Landfill is performed on an emergency basis.
Management of these efforts has been modified to increase the efficiency of collection.
As wind conditions can not be predicted, variable wind conditions require that sufficient
resources be mobilized to the landfill with limited notification. Given these requirements,
costs have increased in order to meet the requirements of timely collection. Per the
Division's recently approved 2003-2004 Supplemental Budget Request for "W. Hawaii
Landfill Litter Control "funds expended for litter control at the West Hawai 'i Sanitary
Landfill exceeded that amount originally estimated for FY2003-2004. FY2004-2005
Budget estimates utilized current cost generation rates and the acquisition of additional
resources to support the site's County -operated disposal area.
PAGE 13
1. What is the status of Workers' Compensation?
Below is a summary of claims paid to date and Reserves for future payments:
Fiscal Year
Paid to date
Reserved for future
payments
1995-2000
$608,211.56
$101,477.12
FY 01-02
$80,688.52
$42,391.94
FY 02-03
$10,315.70
$16,530.08
FY03-04
$15,269.68
$16,387.39
We currently have 27 open claims. State Worker's Compensation rules establish not only
the reserved amounts for the injuries, but also determines the settlement amounts for the
claims. Therefore, the department can only control the work conditions of its employees.
It cannot control the medical, legal, and settlement costs of the industrial injuries.
Our new Division Chief and Acting Solid Waste Superintendent are actively addressing
the working conditions of the employees. The division is working with its supervisors to
insure that employees receive proper training and equipment to perform their duties. The
division is also encouraging its employees to report potentially unsafe work conditions to
reduce the potential for accidents.
16
SEWER FUND
PAGE 1
DEPARTMENT GOALS
1. Should goals include statement about revenues and self-sufficiency?
We could establish a goal that the Sewer Fund remains self-sufficient.
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES - ADMINISTRATION
1. What efforts are being taken to improve collections?
Immediate:
• We'll be accepting credit cards as a method of payment.
• We're taking a closer look more frequently at our accounts with outstanding balances
to determine possible write-offs. Hawaii County Code Section 2-109 regarding
uncollectible accounts was recently changed to remove the requirement of 2 -year
delinquency before write-offs for accounts that are determined uncollectible.
• We've implemented charging interest on our payment plans as an incentive to
accelerate the pay off period for delinquent balances before it gets referred to a
collection agency.
• We also have a new collection agency with extensive experience with government and
utility accounts, proposed better success rate, and supported by more collection
resources. They also use electronic transmissions for reports and information which
accelerates the process and allows more options and time for collections.
• Attend and participate in scheduled monthly collection meetings held to monitor the
progress on collections, establish new methods and procedures to reduce and
improve collections, as well as formulate changes in immediate and long-term
policies to reduce delinquencies.
Long-term:
• We would like to work with the Council on a change to Hawaii County Code to make
the property owner ultimately responsible for delinquent charges.
• Other possibilities are shutting off water or blocking the lateral connection for
accounts with unpaid sewer bills.
• With the upcoming FRESH system, a central accounting system with information
from all departments can be established to merge County vendor, contract and
accounts payable information with outstanding receivables to establish other
collection opportunities.
PAGE 2
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES — OPERATIONS
1. Maintain preventable sewage spills to less than 5 per year.
1. If the spill is preventable, there should not be any spills. Wording appears as though
the Wastewater Division is ineffective or not doing the jobs. Recommend change in
language.
17
Preventable spills are those that we could have theoretically prevented. Prevention
methods generally include inspecting, cleaning and repairing damaged sewers and pump
stations. In order to completely prevent the spills, we would need to inspect or clean
lines much more frequently than we do now. This would be prohibitively expensive and
not cost effective. Historically we used to have quite a few preventable spills every year
and most other counties still have them. We have been fortunate to have gotten ahead of
this problem in the last few years and now rarely have a preventable spill. However, just
because other agencies continue to have preventable spills does not mean they are
ineffective. The problems are many and it is not easy to avoid spills. We could change
the language to "theoretically preventable".
2. Obtain acceptable rating from the Department of Health for at least 60% of our total
number of facilities for FY 03-04.
1. How bad is it currently that we do not have acceptable ratings for all County of Hawaii
facilities? In order to obtain acceptable ratings, what will the cost be?
It is not necessarily bad that we do not have acceptable ratings for all our facilities. In
order to obtain all acceptable ratings, regulatory as well as financial obstacles need to
be addressed including removal of sewer connection exemptions and funding for effluent
reuse in Kona, which would cost between $5-10M.
3. Maintain laboratory quality control for FY 03-04.
1. Please explain when we started to maintain laboratory quality control. What kinds of
tests does this cover?
We have always maintained laboratory quality control. What this item primarily refers
to is a national laboratory Quality Control test, which we have always passed.
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
PAGE 3
5631.02-110 Repairs to Facilities
1. Is this account necessary? Only $2440 expended in the last 2-1/2 years.
Yes. This is for routine facility repairs not covered by equipment replacement fund.
2. Are facilities being neglected?
No.
5631.02-217 Cleaning/Sanitation Supplies
1. Request more detail for Misc. Process Control since large increase.
Increase due to initiation of chemical injection for odor control in Hilo collection system.
PAGE 4
5631.02-341 Misc. Charges
1. What does EM admin Fees cover?
18
Allocation of Department costs.
2. Why did Admin Fees budget more than double?
The accounting section was transferred to DEM budget
PAGE
5912.93-110 Repairs to Facilities
1. Please explain need for equipment. Will it help with "acceptable rating" from the
Department of Health?
Need equipment to keep operations running. Items requested in this line item will not
affect acceptable rating offacilities unless we fail to fund or implement the needed
repairs, which would likely result in unacceptable ratings for our facilities.
19
Estimate based on July 03 -Jan 04 actual data & future projected mulching
Estimate based on anticipated increased greenwaste/organics diversion & composting vs mulching greenwaste
Total Greenwaste Diverted
25,000
20,000
N
15,000
c
0
10,000
5,000
0
U') CO I` CO O O T N
O O O
N N N
M
O
N
d'
O
N
O
N
Fiscal Years
® Total GW
Estimate based on July 03 -Jan 04 actual data & future projected mulching
Estimate based on anticipated increased greenwaste/organics diversion & composting vs mulching greenwaste
110919111111
500,000
400,000
N
C
O
F
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
Projected FY MSW Totals
Doubling pt. based on
8.2% rate of increase
C, IN t`7 « lO rD n N tT O N CY) V'
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Years
Total MSW @ 4.0% Increase f Total MSW @ 8.2% Increase
The discrepancy in MSW tonnage from'Superceded" to "Exhibit A" was the result of switching to a single reliable data source.
Projected 4% increase was based on FY00-03. In FY04 8.2% increase has been observed.
Doubling pt. based on
4.0% rate of increase
LO co r- m rn o
N Nq (N N N CVS
�t •� tip c tir l� ,� ,L }.! v�Y{ � ..r 1 -Sav t'Y. t Y ..
�t
5 -Year Plan for Transfer Station Enhancements
Rankings established based on parcel size, service area population, district popluaaon, average annual tonnage, / Increase/decrease n
X04 0� y\
bb
o`,p'O QaQ\ab
tet
Gac Go°
Q -OP It* �C,9O `e4.
a�a
�QJ
cga
\o
Rankings Transfer Stations
Q -°a0
0
G�aeCAaa
.'oe�
1 Ka'auhuhu (Hawl)
x
x
X2006
2 Kallua-Kona Kealakehe
x
x
x
x x
2004
3 Keauhou
x
x
x
2006
4 Hilo
x
x
x
x x
2005
5 Waimea
x
x
x"
x x
2006
6 Kea'au
x
x
x
x x
2004
7 Pa aikou
x
x
x
2005
8 Pence
x
x
It
2005
9 Glenwood
x
x
x
2005
10 Walohinu
x
x
x
2005
11 Honoka'a
x
X.
x
2006
12 Kala ana
x
2005
13 Walea
x
2006
14 Puako
x
x
x
2007
15 Volcano
x
2007
16 Ke ei
x
2007
17 Pa'aulio
x
2007
18 Honomu
x
2008
19 Lau hoehoe
x
2008
20 Pahala
x
2007
21 Milohl
x
2008
Kahuku HOVE - In rocess
x
x
x
x x
2005
• lkolos (to be planned)
Wa
x
x
x
2008
otos rans er at/ons
5
14
14
23 5
2 10 14 19 23
t i last 4 earo
tonna
n y
These transfer stations are currently less than 1 acre. To provide for greenwaste collections, the County will either need to acquire additional area or have containerized collections only.
Funding Sources for Planned Transfer Station Enhancements
Rankings established based on parcel size, service area population, district poplustion, average annual tonnage, % increase/decrease in tonnage in last 4 years.
'-These transfer stations enhancements may be eligible for partial funding through EPA grant funds being pursued for future fiscal years.
3 These transfer stations enhancements may be eligible for partial funding through future CDBG grant funds.
"These are new transfer stations called for in the County General Plan. ocean View is planned for construction by 2006, Waikoloa by 2008.
CDBG: Community Development Block Grant FY 2004-05
EPA Grant: Funds appropriated by Congress for Waste Reduction and Recycling pilot projects in Hawaii County.
CIP: Capital Improvement Planning funds
0
011
oa�aye�
a�
oa°`fie
J00
�c`,�°
r
a°�°
oip* G°o
Funding Source for
`�S��o
°�Q
oc�
L��oyJa4 py°
�a e
Ranking
Improvements
Transfer Stationsa�J
1
County Funds2
Kaauhuhu Hawl
No
x
x
z
2
EPA Grant/County
Kailua•Kona Kealakehe
No
x
x
x
x x
3County
Funds'
Keauhou
No
x
x
x
x x
4
County CIP Funds
Hilo
No
x
x
x
5
County Funds
Waimea
No
x
x
x
x x
x
6EPA
Grant/County
Kes'au
Yes
x
x
x
x
x
7
CDBG
Pa aikou
Yes
x
x
8
CDBG
Pahoa
Yes
x
x
x
9
CDBG
Glenwood
Yes
x
x
x
10
CDBG
Walohinu
Yes
x
x
x
11
County Funds'
Honoka'a
No
x
x
x
12
CDBG
Kala ana
Yes
x
13
CountyFunds'
Walea
No
x
14
County Funds2
Puako
No
x
x
x
15
County Funds3
Volcano
Yes
x
16
County Funds
Ke'ei
No
x
17
County Funds
Pa'aullo
Yes
x
18
County Funds3
Honomu
Yes
x
19
County Funds3
Lau hoehoe
Yes
x
20
County Funds3
Pahala
Yes
x
21
County Funclsr
Mlloll'I
Yes
x
Coun CIP Funds
Kahuku HOVE • in process)as
x
x
x
x x
x
County CIP Funds
Waikoloa (to be planned)
No
x
x
Rankings established based on parcel size, service area population, district poplustion, average annual tonnage, % increase/decrease in tonnage in last 4 years.
'-These transfer stations enhancements may be eligible for partial funding through EPA grant funds being pursued for future fiscal years.
3 These transfer stations enhancements may be eligible for partial funding through future CDBG grant funds.
"These are new transfer stations called for in the County General Plan. ocean View is planned for construction by 2006, Waikoloa by 2008.
CDBG: Community Development Block Grant FY 2004-05
EPA Grant: Funds appropriated by Congress for Waste Reduction and Recycling pilot projects in Hawaii County.
CIP: Capital Improvement Planning funds
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SUMMARY
FY 2003-2004 (as of 12/31/2003)
State funded program
State funded program managed by Recycle Hawaii. Annual budget is $55,000
*'* KRRC = KRRC (Total Tonnage - Greenwaste - Scrap Metal) + KRRC Reuse Center Tonnage
DESCRIPTION
EAST HAWAII
WEST HAWAII
Volume tons
Cost
Volume tons
Cost
LANDFILL
1
Commercial
19,198.99
N/A
34,636.66
$
1,315,500.35
2
County SWD
18,606.53
N/A
21,287.15
$
947,506.45
3
Residential Credits
N/A
$
59,656.05
N/A
$
43,391.70
4
Other Haulers
N/A
TOTAL LANDFILL
37,805.521
$
59,656.05
55,923.81
$
2,306,398.50
RECYCLING
1
Greenwaste
1,723.72
$
73,662.00
6,906.88
$
220,986.00
2
Metal/Automobiles
7,092.14
$
513,832.73
1,305.55
$
206,279.44
3
Tires
0.00
$
-
0.00
$
-
4
Paper
1,521.91
$
60,876.24
606.46
$
24,258.58
5
Cooking Oil
70.54
$
2,821.71
0.00
$
-
6
Glass*
478.53
$
95,705.13
265.84
$
53,167.90
7
Household Hazardous Waste
7.77
$
35,009.00
3.96
$
35,009.00
8
Used Motor Oil Program"
10.92
$
13,750.00
11.52
$
13,750.00
9
KRRC *"
305.84
$
-
0.00
$
-
10
Education
N/A
$
12,500.00
N/A
$
12,500.00
TOTAL RECYCLING
11,211.37
$
808,156.81
9,100.21
$
565,950.92
TOTAL LANDFILL + RECYCLING
L 49,016.891
$
867,812.86
65,024.02
$
2,872,349.42
TOTAL RECYCLING COUNTY
OF HAWAII
1 20,311.58
$
1,374,107.73
TOTAL LANDFILL COUNTY OF HAWAII
93,729.33
$
2,366,054.55
TOTAL LANDFILL + RECYCLING COUNTY OF HAWAII
114,040.91
$
3,740,162.28
COUNTY DIVERSION RATE
17.81%
RECYCLING COST PER TON
State funded program
State funded program managed by Recycle Hawaii. Annual budget is $55,000
*'* KRRC = KRRC (Total Tonnage - Greenwaste - Scrap Metal) + KRRC Reuse Center Tonnage