ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
590YgnacioValleyRoad, Suite105 JohnW. Farnkopf, PE
WalnutCreek, California94596 LaithB. Ezzet, CMC
Telephone: 925/977-6950 RichardJ. Simonson
www.hfh-consultants.com MarvaM. Sheehan, CPA
RobertC. Hilton
November27, 2023
UrsulaSyrova
EnvironmentalProgramsManager
PublicWorks
10300TorreAvenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Subject: Reviewof RecologySouthBayRatePeriodFourContractor’sCompensationApplication ReferenceNumber: S7018
DearUrsulaSyrova:
HF&H Consultants, LLC’s (HF&H) is pleasedto presentour findingsand recommendationsto the Cityof Cupertino (City) from our reviewof RecologySouthBay’s (Recology) RatePeriodFour (RP4) Contractor’s CompensationApplication (Application), whichwassubmittedonAugust1, 2023. Thisreport presentsour findingsandrecommendationsandisorganizedinto the followingthree sections:
I. SummaryandRecommendations
II. Background
III. HF&HAnalysis
It shouldbe noted that this report is basedsolelyon our review of Recology’s Applicationpreparedin accordancewith the methodologyprescribedin its franchiseagreement (Agreement) with the City.
I. SUMMARYAND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Review of Recology’s RP 4 Rate Application ( for rates effective 2/ 1/ 24) Recology’s Applicationcalculateda revenuerequirementof $20,505,312 to providecurrent franchised servicesfor RP4 (seeTable1).
AttachmentC
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page2 of 12
Table1: Recology’sRP4 RateApplication
Note: Numbersmaynot sumexactlydueto rounding.
Basedon our recommendedadjustmentsto the Application, we havedeterminedthat a total revenue requirementof $19,475,934isappropriateandconsistentwith the ratesettingmethodologydescribedin the Agreement. Theseadjustmentsresultin a5.02% overallrateincreaseto providethe servicescurrently ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page3 of 12
required in the Agreement. TheCitymay apply a different rate increaseby sectoror useCityfundsin order to generatethe overall 5.02% rate increase. HF&H’s adjustmentsto Recology’s Applicationare describedin more detail in SectionIII.C below. We have reviewed our findings with Recology, and Recologyagreeswith the proposedrate adjustmentunlessotherwisenotedin this letter report.
II. BACKGROUND
A. General
The Agreementwith Recologyfor recyclablematerials, organicmaterials, and solid waste collection, recyclablematerialsandorganicmaterialsprocessingservices, andtransportfor disposalcommencedin February2021. In accordancewith Article8.2.Bof the Agreement, Recology’smaximumratesfor RP1-3 were determined at the start of the Agreement. In accordancewith Article 8.2.C of the Agreement, Recology’s compensationshall be adjustedannuallyin subsequentrate periods, beginningwith RP4 through the remainingterm of the Agreement, includingany extensionperiods. The adjustmentsto Recology’s compensationshall be determined using one of two methodologies: (i) an index-based adjustmentor (ii) a cost-basedadjustment (detailedrate review).
In RP4, rates shall be adjusted using the cost-basedmethodologyas describedin Exhibit E2 of the Agreement. Thecost-basedmethodologyinvolvesreview of Recology’s actual cost of operationsand operationalstatistics (staffing levels, routes, route hours, customers, and their servicelevels, etc.) to determine the actual allowabletotal annual cost of operationsfor the most-recently completedrate periodto forecastRecology’sallowablecostsfor RP4.
Theintent of performingthe cost-basedadjustmentis to examinethe actual coststo servethe City’s ratepayers, insteadof relyingon Recology’sproposedcostsfrom the proposalprocess. Thismethodology takesinto considerationthe impactsof changesin inflation, deflation, number of customers, and the servicelevelsof eachcustomerto determineRecology’sallowablecompensation.
Additionally, becausethe ratesfor RP1-3 were set at the start of the Agreement, the Citywishesto use this rate adjustmentprocessto reconcileanysignificantcostareasthat Recologywascompensatedfor, but did not incur, or that the Cityincorporatedinto the projectedSolidWasteFundOperationsFeethat the Citydid not yet incurcostsfor, andintegratethe impactin this year’srate adjustment.
III. HF&H ANALYSIS
A. Scope of Work
Ourapproachto this engagementwasto work objectivelyto follow the compensationadjustmentterms of the Agreementbetween Recologyand the City. When performing the proceduresdescribedin the Agreementfor the cost-basedadjustment, we reliedon Recology’sauditedfinancialstatements, current year-to-datefinancialresultsof operationsdata, copiesof transactions, reportsof operations, andother informationprovidedby Recology, Recology’sproposalto the City, andindustrystandards.
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page4 of 12
The results of our review and our findingswere documentedby the HF&H staff that performed the engagement and were consequently objectively reviewed by our EngagementManager. This documentationand subsequentHF&H adjustmentswere madeavailableto Recologyand the City for review. While taking direction from the City, we worked cooperativelywith Recologyin an open and transparentmannerto ensurethat Recologyunderstoodour proceduresandpreliminaryfindings. In this capacity, the Cityand Recologyhad the opportunity to correct anymisunderstandingsand understand the reasonsfor anyadjustmentsto the Applicationthat we recommended.
HF&H staff performed this review based upon proceduresagreed upon by the City and HF&H, as documentedin our proposal, and the agreementbetween the City and Recology. Theseprocedures includedthe followingactivities:
We reviewed the Applicationto ensureits completenessand compliancewith the methodology describedin the Agreement.
We reviewedthe Applicationfor mathematicalaccuracyand internal consistency. We alsochecked that the summaryschedulesagreedto the supportingschedulesandworksheets.
WeverifiedRecologycorrectlycalculatedtheir RP4 compensationusingthe allowableexpensesand the correctpercentagechangesin CPIin accordancewith the Agreement.
WereviewedtheApplicationbyperforming: areviewof revenue; averificationof solidwastetonnage anddisposalexpenses; a reviewof organicmaterialtonnageand processingexpenses; anda review of recyclablecommodityrevenueandprocessingcosts.
We comparedactual RP2 coststo projections and inquired about any significantunexplainable variances.
We verified that the estimated RP3 gross receipts were correctly calculatedaccordingto the methodologyper the Agreement.
Wereviewedthe coststo processmulti-familyandcommercialsolidwaste, whichdidnot occurduring RP1-3, anddiscussedwith the Cityoptionsto integratethesefundsin the rate adjustmentprocess.
We reviewedthe updatedSolidWasteFundOperationsFeewith the Cityto integrateinto the rate application.
We met with the City and Recologyto review the recommendedadjustmentsto the Application describedherein.
Wepreparedawritten draft andfinalreport to documentour findingsandrecommendationsto share at the Councilmeeting.
B. Limitations
Our review was substantiallydifferent in scope than an examinationin accordancewith Generally AcceptedAuditingStandards, the objectiveof whichisthe expressionof anopinionregardingthefinancial statementstaken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not expresssuch an opinion. Sucha review was conducted, andanopinionexpressedby Recology’sindependentaccountantsBFBA, LLP.
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page5 of 12
Our conclusionsare basedon the review of Recology’s projectionsof its financialresultsof operations.
Actual results of operations will usually differ from projections becauseevents and circumstances frequentlydo not occurasexpected, andthe differencemaybesignificant.
C. Review of RP 4 Application ( February 1, 2024 – January 31, 2025) The City engagedHF&H to perform a review of Recology’s Applicationsubmitted in accordancewith Section 8.2.C of the Agreement. Recologysubmitted the Application on August 1, 2023. HF&H’s proceduresincludedthe followingsteps:
Step 1: Verification of the Mathematical Accuracy
HF&H reviewed Recology’s Application to determine completeness, mathematical accuracy, reasonableness, and logical consistencyof the assumptionssupporting the projected revenuesand expenses. Thisincluded:
Verificationthat all costindicesusedto projectexpensesconformedto ExhibitE2of the Agreement; Verificationof the mathematicalaccuracyof Recology’scompensationadjustmentcalculations; and, Verificationof the consistencyandintegrity of the spreadsheetshousingcalculations.
HF&H found that Recology’s applicationwas mathematicallycorrect and usedthe correct indices. No adjustmentsrequired.
Step 2: Determine Current Cost Components
Asrequiredby ExhibitE2.2.A.1 of the Agreement, we found that Recologydid correctlyusethe actual expensesincurred for RP2 (Labor-related, Vehicle-related costs, fuel, etc.) as the starting point for calculatingtheir RP4 allowablecompensation. However, Recologydid not excludeallnon-allowablecosts asdetailedin ExhibitE2.2.A.2. HF&H adjustedallocatedcoststo removenon-allowablecostsrelatedto legalservices, citations, and tax penalties. Thedollar effect of this adjustmentis includedwith Step3 F below.
Step 3: Adjust Specific Cost Component
A. Labor-RelatedCosts
Section2.A.3.a of ExhibitE2statesthat the projectedlabor-relatedcostsfor the comingrate periodshall be calculatedby (i) multiplying the allowedlabor-related cost, both direct and allocated, for the most recently completed Rate Period by one plus the Annual PercentageChangein the CPI-U, and (ii) multiplyingthe resultof steponeoncemoreby oneplusthe AnnualPercentageChangein the CPI-U. We reviewedandverifiedthe reasonablenessof Recology’s actualRP2 labor-relatedexpensesandinquired aboutanylargevariancesfrom projectedRP2costs, notingnounexplainablevariances. Adjustmentswere madepursuantto the 5% capon total annualoperatingcostsasfurther describedin Step3 Hbelow.
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page6 of 12
B. Vehicle-RelatedCosts (excludingfuel anddepreciationcosts) Section2.A.3.b. of ExhibitE2statesthat projected vehicle-related costsfor the comingrate year shall equalthe allowablevehicle-relatedcosts (i) multiplied by one plusthe percentagechangein the Moter VehicleIndexand (ii) multiplyingthe resultof steponeby the samepercentagechangeusedin stepone.
Adjustmentswere madepursuantto the 5% capon total annualoperatingcostsasfurther describedin Step3 Hbelow.
C. FuelCosts
Section2.A.3.c of ExhibitE2statesthat projected fuel costsfor the comingrate year shall equal the allowablefuel costs (i) multipliedby oneplusthe percentagechangein the FuelIndexand (ii) multiplying the result of step one by the samepercentagechangeusedin step one. We reviewedand verified the reasonablenessof Recology’s actual RP2 fuel expensesand inquired about any large variancesfrom projectedRP2 costs, notingnounexplainablevariances. Adjustmentsweremadepursuantto the 5% cap on total annualoperatingcostsasfurther describedin Step3 Hbelow.
D. Other Costs
Section2.A.3.d of ExhibitE2statesthat projectedother costsfor the comingrate year shallequalthe allowableother costs (i) multipliedbyoneplusthe percentagechangein the CPI-Uand (ii) multiplyingthe resultof steponeby the samepercentagechangeusedin stepone. Adjustmentsweremadepursuantto the 5% capon total annualoperatingcostsasfurther describedin Step3 Hbelow.
E. Depreciation
Section2.A.3.eof ExhibitE2statesthat directdepreciationshallbefixedat $905,853peryearfor vehicles, containers, and facilities. Recology’s application correctly included depreciation at $ 905,853. No adjustmentrecommended.
F. AllocatedCosts – Labor, Vehicle, Fuel, andOtherCosts Section2.A.3.f of ExhibitE2statesthat allocatedcostsfor labor, vehicle, fuel, other, anddepreciationshall equalthe allowableallocatedcosts (i) multiplied by oneplusthe percentagechangein the CPI-U and (ii) multiplying the result of step one by the samepercentagechangeusedin step one. However, Section
2.A.1.a through f of ExhibitE2indicatesthe variousindicesappliedby expensecategoryapply to both direct andallocatedexpenses. In other words, insteadof applyingthe CPI-U to the total allocatedcosts, allocatedlabor costswill be increasedby the ECI, allocatedvehiclecostswill be increasedby the Motor VehicleIndex, allocatedfuel costswill be increasedby the FuelIndex, allocateddepreciationwill be held flat, andother costswill beincreasedby the CPI-U. Assuch, HF&Hrecalculatedthe allocatedcostsfor RP 4 by applyingthe individual labor, fuel, vehicle, and other indicesto the allocated cost categories.
Allocateddepreciationwasheldflat, the FuelIndexwaslessthanthe CPI-U, andnon-allowablecostswere removedfrom allocatedcosts. Assuch, HF&Hrecommendsadecreaseof $44,126to reflectthe netimpact of non-allowablecostsfrom Step2 andthe multipleindiceson allocatedcosts.
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page7 of 12
G. AllocatedCosts – DepreciationandStart-Up Costs
Section2.A.3.g of ExhibitE2statesthat AllocatedDepreciationand Start-Up Costsshallbe $35,311 per yearandarenot annuallyadjusted. Recology’sApplicationcorrectlyincludedAllocatedDepreciationand Start-UpCostsof $35,311. Noadjustmentrecommended.
H. TotalCostof Operations
Section2.A.3.h of ExhibitE2statesthat the total of SectionsA – Gaboveshallbesubjectto the 5% capas describedin Section1 of ExhibitE2. Forthe comingrateperiod, total forecastedannualcostof operations for RP4 maynot be more than a 5% increaseto the total annualcostof operationsfor the then-current rate period (RP3). HF&H calculatedthe 5% capbasedon the RP3 total annualcostof operations, which wascalculatedper the indexmethodologyin ExhibitE1. HF&H noted that the sumof SectionsA – Gwas abovethe 5% cap. HF&Hadjustedthe total forecastedannualcostof operationsfor RP4 to meetthe 5% capandrecommendsa $909,320decreasein total costof operations (exclusiveof prior adjustmentsfrom Steps2 and3).
I. Profit
We found that Recologycorrectly calculatedits allowableprofit by applyingan 72.5% operatingratio approximately an 27.5% profit) to its allowable operating costs; however, due to the calculated adjustmentsdescribedabove, we recommenda $361,652decreaseto Recology’sprofit.
J. Pass-ThroughCostsDisposalandProcessingCosts – All Material Streams SolidWasteDisposal
Section2.A.3.C.4 of ExhibitE2statesthe projectedcostto processsolidwastedisposalshallbecalculated basedon the total tonsof materialsprocessedduringthe mostrecentlycompleted12-month rate period multipliedby the allowableper-ton disposalfee.
Theper-ton disposalfee adjustseveryJuly1. Becausethe City’s rate period is from February – January, the disposalfee adjustsin the middle of the rate period. Recologyproposeda methodologyto account for these timing differences: a weighted averagebasedon the current rate and the most recent rate increase. Theper-ton disposalfeeisknownfor February2024throughJune2024 ($47.59). TheJuly2024 January2025rate is the current per-ton disposalfee increasedby July1, 2023rate increase ($47.59 x
1.022 = $50.67). Theweightedaveragewascalculatedasfollows: (($47.59x5)+($50.67x7))/12 = $48.22.
HF&Hreviewedthis calculationfor reasonablenessandagreeswith Recology’sproposedmethodology.
However, Recology’sproposedRP4 disposalcostsdid not takeinto considerationthe first amendmentto the disposalagreement. The amendmentstates the tipping fee for the disposaland/or recyclingof MunicipalSolidWasteat NewbyIslandasof July1, 2024, shallbetheamountadjustedpursuantto Section
5.2 and5.4 of thisAgreementplusanadditional $2.00per-ton to the adjustableportion of the tippingfee.
Asaresult, HF&Hrecommendsanincreaseof $2.00per-ton to July2024NewbyIsland’stippingfee, which ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page8 of 12
modified the weightedaveragecalculationand yieldeda per-ton disposalrate of $49.39. HF&H revised the applicationto usethis per-ton rate andnotedthe net impactof $13,380in Table2 below.
RecyclingProcessing
Section2.A.3.C.1 of ExhibitE2statesthe projectedcostto processrecyclablematerialsshallbecalculated basedon the total tonsof materialsprocessedduringthe mostrecentlycompleted12-month rate period multiplied by the allowable per-ton processingfee. The City’s recyclingprocessoris GreenWaste; however, the processingagreementisbetweenRecologyandGreenWaste, not the CityandGreenWaste, and therefore the details of the processingagreementare not availablefor HF&H to review. HF&H receivedcommunicationsfrom GreenWastestating the increasefor RP4 to be about $1.25 per ton.
Recology’scalculationof the allowableper-ton processingfeereflectedthe processingexpenseincurred duringthe mostrecentlycompleted12-monthrateperiod (RP2) dividedbytonscollectedin RP2 ($31.01).
Thisrate wasincreasedby $1.25twice to calculatethe RP4 per ton rate of $33.51.
Recologyfurther explained that the processingcharge at GreenWastehas four tiers that change throughoutthe year. Thetiers arebasedon contaminationandincludeseasonalwet material; it is not a set rate throughout the year. Therefore, a full 12 months should be consideredfor any comparative analysis. Becausewe are in the middle of RP3, a full 12 months at the current processingtiers are unavailableandanaverageof the availablemonthsin RP3 (February2023 – September2023) wouldnot capturethe full scaleof seasonalmaterial. Therefore, Recologyprovidedthe RP2 averagerate per ton andincreasedit by $1.25twice to capturethis seasonality.
HF&H reviewedRecology’s proposedmethodologyfor RP4 and deemedit reasonable. TheRP4 rate of
33.51 will be usedasin the RP4 cost-basedrate adjustmentmethodology. Therefore, no adjustment requiredto the per ton recyclingprocessingrate.
OrganicMaterialsProcessing
Section2.A.3.C.2 through 3 of ExhibitE2describesthe projectedcostto processorganicmaterialsshall be calculatedbasedon the total tons of materialsprocessedduring the most recently completed12- month rate period (i) multiplied by one plusthe percentagechangein the CPI-U and (ii) multiplyingthe resultof stepone by the samepercentagechangeusedin stepone. No adjustmentrequiredto the per- ton organicmaterialsrate.
ConstructionandDemolitionProcessing
Section2.A.3.C.4 of ExhibitE2describesthe projectedcostto processconstructionanddemolition (C&D) materialsshall be calculatedbasedon the total tons of materialsprocessedduring the most recently completed12-monthrateperiodmultipliedbythe allowableper-ton processingfee. Becausethe disposal agreementfor solid wasteis inclusiveof C&D materials, and the first amendmentonly appliesto solid waste, the weightedaverageper-ton rate for C&D is $48.22. Therefore, no adjustmentrequiredto the per-ton C&Drate.
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page9 of 12
TonnageAdjustment
Thetonnageinformationsubmittedby Recologyfor RP4 did not tie to the City’smonthly reports. HF&H inquiredwith Recology, who acknowledgedthe tonnagewassubmittedin error andthat it shouldalign with the City’smonthlyreports. HF&Hcorrectedthe tonnagein the applicationto agreewith the tonnage aspresentedin the City’smonthlyreports.
Table2 below summarizesthe tonnageadjustmentsrelatedto both per-ton calculationcorrectionsand tonnagecorrectionsnotedabove.
Table2: HF&HAdjustmentto Tons
K. Interest Expense
Section2.C.5 of ExhibitE2statesinterestexpenseshallbefixedat $326,655andisnot annuallyadjusted.
Recology’sApplicationcorrectlyincludedaninterestexpenseof $326,655. Noadjustmentrecommended.
L. DirectandAllocatedLeaseCosts
Section2.C.6 of ExhibitE2statesDirectLeaseCostsshallbe fixed at $0, until RP10, andis not annually adjusted. Section2.C.7 of ExhibitE2statesAllocatedLeaseCostsshall be fixed at $180,00 and is not annuallyadjustedover the term of the Agreement. Recology’s ApplicationcorrectlyincludedDirectand AllocatedLeaseCostsat $180,000. Noadjustmentrecommended.
M. CityFees / Reimbursements
SolidWaste FundOperationsFee: TheSolidWasteFundOperationsFee (SWFOFee) paymentfor the comingRatePeriodshallequalthe total SolidWasteFundOperationsFeepaid to the Cityin the most- recentlycompleted12-month periodmultiplied by oneplusthe AnnualPercentageChangein the CPI-U, or suchother amountasisdeterminedby the Cityin accordancewith Section7.2. Recology’sapplication includedthe RP2 SWFOFeeamount. HF&H workedwith the Cityto determinethe projectedSWFOFee amountrequiredin RP4 andrecommendsanincreaseof $34,360for a total SWFOFeeof $1,635,697.
Rate Application ReviewCost: Section2.E.4 of Exhibit E1 states Recologyis required to pay City to reimburseCityfor City’scosts, includingconsultingandlegalfees, associatedwith determinationof Rates for the comingRatePeriod. Recologydid not include the cost of the rate applicationreview in costs reimbursedto the City. HF&Hrecommendsincluding $85,000.
Material ProposedRP4
Tons
HF&HRP4
Tons
Impacton Revenue
Requirement
SolidWaste 16,502 16,382 13,380$
RecyclableMaterials 7,251 8,026 26,021
OrganicResidential 7,424 8,362 93,445
OrganicCommercial 5,944 6,222 37,726
C&D 2,422 2,334 ( 4,213)
Total 39,542 41,328 166,359$
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page10of 12
Step 4: Other Adjustments
Section2.F states that from time to time, it may be necessaryto make other adjustmentsto the compensationcalculation, either as mutually agreedor as required under variousprovisionson the Agreement.
TheCity plansto usereservesor other funding sourcesto reducethe RP4 rate impact on customers.
HF&H’sreport isreflectiveof the overallrate increasebeforethe City’suseof funds.
Step 5: Determine Projected Gross Receipts
Section3 statesthat the projectedgrossreceiptsat then-currentratesshallreflectprojectedannualgross receiptsfrom all customers. On-callservicesandspecialchargesshallbebasedon the prior 12monthsof billingactivity. Recologybasedits grossreceiptson currentsubscriptionandrate revenuefor onemonth in RP3, multipliedby12monthsto annualize, andaddedannualdebrisboxandcompactorsrevenuefrom February2022 – January2023inflated by 5%. HF&H reviewedthe reasonablenessof Recology’smethod of calculatingprojectedgrossreceiptsandperformedour own build-up of rate revenuebasedon actual RP2 revenueandthe predeterminedrate increasesin RP3. HF&Hrecommendsthe followingadjustment to the projectedgrossreceipts:
Miscellaneousservice and recycling revenue were not included in Recology’s calculation. HF&H recommenda $14,862 increaseto Recology’s projected grossreceipts to account for miscellaneous revenueattributableto the City.
Step 6: Adjusted Revenue Requirement
Thefollowing table summarizesRecology’s requestedrevenuerequirementof $20,505,312 to provide current franchisedservicesfor RP4 and HF&H’s adjusted Application. Basedon our recommended adjustmentsto the Application describedin this report, we have determined that a total revenue requirementof $19,475,934 (a decreaseof $1,029,378from Recology’sApplication) isappropriateanda recommended5.02% overallrate increaseis consistentwith the rate-settingmethodologydescribedin the Agreement. TheCitymayapplya different rate increaseby customersectoror useCityfundsin order to generatethe overall5.02% rate increase.
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page11of 12
Table3: HF&HAdjustedRateApplication
Note: Numbersmaynot sumexactlydueto rounding.
ProposedRY4 Adjustments HF&HRP4
Labor-related Costs 5,256,746$ -$ 5,256,746$ Vehicle-related Costs (excluding fuel) 794,980 - 794,980 FuelCosts 543,089 - 543,089 Other Costs 482,240 - 482,240 Direct Depreciation 905,853 - 905,853 Allocated Costs 3,362,188 ( 44,126) 3,318,063 Allocated Costs (Depreciation and Start-Up) 35,311 - 35,311 Total Costof Operations 11,380,408$ ( 44,126)$ 11,336,282$ Applicationof 5% Cap ( 909,320)$
Total Costof Operations with Cap 10,426,962$
Profit (assumingoperating ratio of .725) 4,316,706$ ( 361,652)$ 3,955,055$ Solid Waste DisposalCosts 795,729$ 13,380$ 809,109$ RecyclableMaterials ProcessingCosts 242,966 26,021 268,987 Residential OrganicMaterials ProcessingCosts 739,034 93,445 832,479 CommercialOrganicMaterials ProcessingCosts 805,697 37,726 843,423 C&D ProcessingCosts 116,781 ( 4,213) 112,568 ReusableMaterials Handling Costs - - - Interest Expense 326,655 - 326,655 Direct LeaseCosts - - - Allocated LeaseCosts 180,000 - 180,000 TotalPassThroughCosts 3,206,862$ 166,359$ 3,373,221$ Solid Waste Fund Operations Fee 1,601,336$ 34,360$ 1,635,697$ RateApplication ReviewCosts - 85,000 85,000 TotalReimbursementsto City 1,601,336$ 119,360$ 1,720,697$ Total CalculatedCosts 20,505,312$ ( 1,029,378)$ 19,475,934$ OtherAdjustments (CityPayments)
CalculatedCosts 20,505,312$ ( 120,058)$ 19,475,934$ Revenue 18,530,975$ 14,862$ 18,545,837$
Surplus / (Shortfall)( 1,974,338)$ ( 930,098)$
Required PercentageIncrease / Decrease 10.65% 5.02%
ManagingTomorrow’s ResourcesToday
UrsulaSyrova
November27, 2023
Page12of 12
We would like to expressour appreciationto Recology’s managementand staff for their assistance. In addition, we expressour appreciationto you for your assistanceand guidanceduringthe courseof the review. Shouldyou have any questions, pleasecontact Dave Hilton directly at (925) 977-6964 or [email protected].
Sincerely,
HF&HCONSULTANTS, LLC
RobC. Hilton DaveHilton
President ProjectManager