2016-02-23_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

537 Mr. Johnson noted that was the rationale of Ramsey County in recommending a 538 five year term to even out those market variables allowing a vendor to be more 539 flexible in their bids. 540 541 At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Johnson advised that most other 542 municipalities are pursuing three year contracts, and if Roseville chose a five year 543 term, it would be one of the few doing so. 544 545 Member Wozniak suggested whether staff was suggesting both options - a three 546 year term with two annual extensions and a five year term be given, or whether 547 they were asking the PWETC to make that determination on a recommendation. 548 549 Mr. Johnson stated that the option was open at this time, and whether the PWETC 550 supported recommending 3 or 5 year contracts, staff was prepared to pursue either 551 at this time. Mr. Johnson noted the final decision would be when the City 552 Council made their determination, and suggested the PWETC provide the City 553 Council with their recommendation to weigh in as part of the Cit Council's 554 deliberation. 555 556 Member Cihacek opined that if a fiveyear erm was presented in the P as an 557 option and allowed a vendor to spread their costs over that time, with a two year 558 extension, allowing staff to determine their actual term as part of final 559 negotiations with a chosen vendor, it could guarantee the city's costs for 560 extending the contract for up to seven years, depending on the benefits of those 561 economics. 562 563 Member Seigler noted that if Ramsey County chose to add more and more 564 expensive requirements, a 5 year contract could provide additional protection for 565 the city and additional rationale in a longer term. 566 567 ember Cihacek noted the value for a vendor to hedge and amortize costs over a 568er term and in future years. 569 570 Mr. ohnson questioned if the city would need to renegotiate the vendor contract 571 if Ram se!respied unuired additional materials be recycled during the contract 572 term. 573 574 Mr. Culverthat the current contract with Eureka allowed the city to 575 terminate the contract with written notice, and anticipated similar language would 576 be included in any future vendor contracts as well. 577 578 Member Cihacek noted a shorter term contract allowed the city to perform seven 579 year cost -comparisons to determine the term; and could include a minimum 3 year 580 term as an option as well with up to 4 annual extensions. Whichever way the city 581 chose to structure the term, Member Cihacek opined that the concern is with the 582 difficulty in managing commodities, especially the Asian markets; suggesting his Page 13 of 20