City of Brentwood
Home PageContact Us!Back

City Administration

2010 Council Goals and Strategic Plan | City Council Members | Calendar of Events | Elections
eNotification | Sub-Committees| Pledge of Allegiance Sign Ups | Invocation Sign Up
Live Streaming Council Meeting | Streaming PC Help |
Streaming Mac Help |

Current Council Agenda and Past Meeting Information

Past Agendas


Meeting Date:  June 27, 2000

Subject/Title:    Northwest Annexation Area— Garaventa Enterprises Garbage Collection Franchise

Submitted by:   Thom Head and Jon Carlson

Approved by:    Jon Elam, City Manager


Authorize the City Manager to continue monitoring and reporting to City Council concerning compliance by Garaventa Enterprises with the garbage collection franchise in the Northwest Annexation and the O’Hara/Neroly Annexation area.


The City of Brentwood annexed an area in the northwest portion of the city as well as the O’Hara/Neroly area (“Northwest Annexation area”) in 1998.   When the City annexed the Northwest Annexation area, Garaventa Enterprises had a franchise agreement with Contra Costa County to service 73 residential customers and less than 10 business in this area.  The City requested, and Contra Costa County granted the request in March 1999, that the County amend its boundaries and changes to its garbage franchise agreement with Garaventa Enterprises due to the annexation.   Public Resources Code permits an existing garbage provider to continue its operation for 5 years after an annexation and appropriate notification has occurred, subject to provision of “comparable frequency and rates” with the City’s current service and rates.  Therefore, Garaventa Enterprises has a right to continue garbage collection under the county franchise, so long as it provides comparable garbage service and charges its customer comparable rates with those in effect in the City.

The City staff met with Garaventa Enterprise representatives to review boundaries and route lists to clarify responsibilities.  Both soon realized that a number of accounts were being incorrectly serviced by each other and agreed to swap accounts to correct the situation.  By January 2000, the customers had been informed and services were swapped to accurately reflect the new boundaries and responsibilities.  With the correct account information, franchise fees could be calculated properly.   In March, the City sent Garaventa Enterprises a reminder concerning payment of franchise fee and a further request for various information needed by the City for such use as AB 939 compliance and accounting. 

City staff met with Garaventa Enterprises representatives on June 7 to discuss administrative fee, franchise fee, comparable frequency and comparable rates, and information exchange required by AB 939. 

Regarding the comparable service, Garaventa Enterprises indicated they will increase the number of recycling items to mirror our program.   Their plan includes implementing separate yard waste collection soon, yet do not intend on providing containers. Residents would be required to set out their yard waste bagged or bundled.  Staff expressed its desire to see something more comparable to our program where residents are provided any size and any number of carts to store their yard waste. Garaventa officials stated the statute states comparable, not identical and they feel that their service will closely resemble the City’s. Their biggest objection was purchasing, stocking and maintaining carts for just 73 accounts for just a few years. The City pointed out that this area will be growing and will soon be joined with the Central Annexation to more easily justify this type of expense. We also floated the idea of them converting residents to carts and putting them on a 10-year depreciation schedule where they would only pay for the years they provide service, then the City would assume the remainder of the debt when the accounts are transferred.

On the matter of the administrative fee, it was their impression that the franchise fee covered our costs incurred because that was the view taken in the past by the County. The City stated the franchise fees were considered a tax and the administrative fees were additional sums required to cover our internal costs and that they will be ongoing for the remainder of the agreement.

Garaventa Enterprises representatives stated that they needed to discuss both the comparable service issue as well as the administrative fees internally would get back to us in a few weeks. As of 6/20/00,  the City Attorney received a telephone call to discuss the legal basis of the franchise and how it relates to the Public Resources Code provisions.   The Garaventa’s legal representative had questions about the status of the County franchise (whether it even has legal effect) and how the franchise interacts with the Public Resources Code.   Further discussions are scheduled for Friday, June 23.  

If Garaventa Enterprises increases their recyclable items to match the City’s frequency and service and begins separate yard waste collection, then the only substantive difference is whether or not the City considers non-containerized service to be inferior to containerized.

From the customer’s perspective, it may be a matter of personal preference. Many like having a dedicated cart or carts, while others don’t like having the carts take up space on their property. In regards to the City’s compliance with AB939 diversion, when comparing similar systems throughout the state, there is no real difference in terms of tonnage collected from either type of system of collection. A successful program is more product of solid public education to get the material segregated in some fashion.

In terms of cost, it should be noted that collection would be weekly for both the recycling and the yard waste as compared to our bi-weekly collection. And they have not indicated a request to increase their current rate structure to pay for these enhancements.

If they are required to provide identical service, then they could adopt our exact rate structure. Otherwise, if we agree to allow their methods of collection to continue, it should be under the rate structure called for currently.







1-can rate

$ 18.50

$ 20.85 (add $3 for cart)

2-can rate

$ 27.50

$ 28.55

3-can rate

$ 33.00

$ 36.25








Included, any size and any # of carts provided

(35 gal – 95 gal.)

Included, one (1) 14 gal.bin provided

Collection frequency



Materials collected

Newspaper, mixed paper, office paper, junk mail, magazines, chipboard, cardboard, paper milk cartons, aluminum & tins cans, glass bottles & jars, plastics #1-7, textiles and small metal appliances

Newspaper, cardboard, aluminum & tins cans, glass bottles & jars, plastics #1 & 2 only








Included, any size and any # of carts provided

(35 gal – 95 gal.)

Not offered. Currently collected with the trash.

Collection frequency



Materials collected

Grass trimmings, shrubs, small branches, leaves and clean lumber






Neighborhood specific

2 per year at the home

City Administration
City of Brentwood City Council
150 City Park Way
Brentwood, CA 94513
(925) 516-5440
Fax (925) 516-5441