My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2013_0617
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
CC_Minutes_2013_0617
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2013 10:12:53 AM
Creation date
7/16/2013 10:04:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/17/2013
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,June 17,2013 <br /> Page 22 <br /> eraged a ten-year lifecycle, with some manufactures actually offering a ten year <br /> guarantee on their carts. <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that if a vendor required a cart that worked with <br /> its equipment, and was required to maintain it, and at the end of the contract was <br /> required to give it to the City, but still had based its bid on that built-in cost for <br /> the cart, how could that be considered a transparent process. Councilmember <br /> McGehee stated that she much preferred to not have City ownership of the cart <br /> and let each vendor come in with their new carts, and if not the next vendor, to <br /> pick them up. <br /> Mr. Pratt clarified that in some cities that happened, but currently there was a cost <br /> savings seen for a city to own the cart, and if another vendor came in they would <br /> factor in the cost of the cart. As an example, Mr. Pratt reviewed the history of the <br /> City of Brooklyn Park when they moved to single sort in 2002/2003, with the City <br /> buying carts, and after five years, uncertain of how this would play out. When the <br /> City went out for bids the second time, they thought vendors would drop their <br /> bids to reflect that they didn't' have to purchase and provide carts; however, it <br /> was found that all bids included the cost of purchasing carts, with vendors under <br /> the impression that they didn't need to provide those cost savings to the City, but <br /> needed their bid to come in at a certain rate. Mr. Pratt advised that similar exam- <br /> ples of prices actually increasing were available from other communities. Mr. <br /> Pratt advised that it was staff's belief that if the City owns the carts, they will see <br /> a cost-savings long-term for Roseville residents for second and subsequent con- <br /> tracts. <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, staff estimated the upfront cost for <br /> cart purchase at $45 to $60 each to be $500,000 to $700,000. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that the proposal provided that the cost get built in and amor- <br /> tized into the contract. <br /> As to how the City could fund the purchase, Mr. Pratt, in consultation with Fi- <br /> nance Director Chris Miller, suggested a small internal loan amortized over five <br /> years in addition to using available recycling funds. <br /> At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Schwartz advised that it was the in- <br /> tent to make it part of the contract, that whoever owns the carts, the vendor would <br /> be responsible for their maintenance and storage, and to roll-out carts, since the <br /> City had neither the staff nor storage space to do so. Mr. Schwartz confirmed that <br /> it would be the vendor's responsibility to replace and pick up damaged carts. <br /> Councilmember Willmus opined that he would like to see the draft RFP come <br /> back with cost differentials included; with Mr. Pratt responding that this was the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.