2013_0826_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 2 of 5 Results 19 All proposals received were for single-stream collection in wheeled carts with collection 20 occurring every other week and co llection would be expanded to in clude rigid plastic containers 21 #1-#7. All proposals received for a five-year cont ract were less expensive per year than their 22 proposals for a three-year contract. 23 There was a substantial difference in price (see Attachment A) between companies. Proposers 24 One (Waste Management) and Two (Allied Waste) both proposed price increases while Proposer 25 Three (Eureka Recycling) offered a substantial price decrease from the current contract. 26 Currently the City pays $2.63 per household per month for service. Proposer three offered $2.22 27 per household per month for a three-year contra ct or $2.05 per household per month for a five-28 year contract if the vendor ow ns the carts. If the City owns the carts the costs would be $1.77 29 per household per month for a three-year contra ct and $1.71 per household per month for a five-30 year contract (see Cart Ownership section below for more detail). 31 Proposer Three also scored best for Project Ca pability, meeting Commun ity Values and Added 32 Value to the Contract (see Added Value section below). 33 Proposer Two scored highest for Past Performance Surveys. Proposer One scored last in all 34 categories. 35 Among highlights from Eureka Recycling’s pr oposal and verified in the interview: 36  They will continue to collect items that no other companies collect: pizza boxes and 37 clothes and textiles. 38  They will sell recyclab les to more Minnesota manufactures than the other proposers 39 offered to do. 40  They will expand their communications programs which include translations of 41 educational material into diffe rent languages. (No other prop oser offered translations.) 42  They will do outreach to businesses allowing them to opt in to the program. 43  Each solid waste/recycling zone would be bis ected with half receiv ing service in week 44 one and the other half recei ving service in week two. 45  While #3 and #6 plastics would be collected, th ey would be sorted out at the materials 46 recovery facility (MRF) a nd trashed. According to Wayne Gjerde, Recycling Market 47 Development Coordinator at the MPCA, ther e are no known American markets for these 48 plastics. 49  All remaining plastics will be sold to dome stic manufacturers trying to achieve highest 50 and best use. 51  Their fleet will run on biodiesel. 52  They will update their fleet to include trucks automated cart dumping equipment by the 53 start of the contract period.. 54  They will allow customer flexibility in selecting cart size. 55 56 57 58