My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2013_0826
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
CC_Minutes_2013_0826
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/24/2013 10:16:16 AM
Creation date
9/24/2013 10:16:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/26/2013
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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,August 26,2013 <br /> Page 8 <br /> Councilmember Laliberte opined that the contract term was an area of considera- <br /> ble change, as experienced with previous contracts versus this most recent RFP; <br /> including not being aware of future changes on the horizon beyond organic col- <br /> lection. <br /> Councilmember Etten questioned if there would be added costs in moving for- <br /> ward with curbside organics collection that would require renegotiation of the <br /> contract. <br /> In response, Mr. Schwartz advised that renegotiations and a contract amendment <br /> would be necessary, but would not affect the base recycling fees; with it being ul- <br /> timately up to the City Council whether or not to accept those renegotiations. <br /> Under that scenario, Councilmember Etten spoke in support of a three (3) year <br /> contract as well to avoid having a longer term contract should those renegotiations <br /> not prove favorable for the City leaving Eureka as its only option. <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Schwartz advised that there <br /> would be minimal impact to households with either a three (3) year versus a five <br /> (5) year contract, as detailed in the RCA(page 2 of 5, lines 27 -28). <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that, no matter the term of the contract, the City <br /> and its residents would be saving money. Councilmember McGehee stated that <br /> she felt strongly about the values of the Eureka organization for this service, not- <br /> ing that they were moving forward with the purchase of new equipment. While <br /> supportive of a five(5) year contract, opining that it provided a better deal for res- <br /> idents as well as the Eureka firm, Councilmember McGehee recognized that she <br /> seemed to be in the minority in supporting staffs recommendation for a five (5) <br /> year contract, and therefore could support a shorter term contract based on majori- <br /> ty preference. <br /> Mayor Roe sought clarification from Councilmembers if there was any objection <br /> for vendor owned carts; with no comment received. <br /> Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, authorization for staff to negotiate a three <br /> (3) year recycling services contract with Eureka Recycling with vendor-owned <br /> carts; with the final agreement to come before the City Council for action. <br /> Mayor Roe stated that a three (3) year contract seemed logical, but he would have <br /> also been fine with a longer term, with any risk associated with those additional <br /> two (2) years having been addressed in the contract. However, with the potential <br /> cost for curbside organics collection, Mayor Roe opined that this allowed some <br /> protection for the City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.