Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Johnson noted that additional research needed; and advised specific to fees, <br /> he looked at that average of collections and average net costs to the city for three <br /> or five years. <br /> Member Seigler suggested locking in a lower price for three years or a higher <br /> price for five years; but opined the need to discuss and consider which was most <br /> beneficial to lock into given the unknowns for year four. <br /> Mr. Culver asked if Member Seigler was looking at base fees or base plus parks; <br /> with Member Seigler responding he was looking at either or. Mr. Culver noted <br /> there were more than two choices; with Member Seigler responding the five year <br /> contract term was higher due to the contractor risk(e.g. l.d on matrix slide). <br /> Mr. Johnson clarified that some had annual averages with the five year contract <br /> term lower (Proposer 3)that required additional thought, noting that just because <br /> the term was three versus five years, didn't necessarily mean it was more <br /> expensive. <br /> To conclude, Mr. Johnson reviewed proposal scenarios and pricing with and <br /> without the parks recycling component. <br /> Member Seigler asked staff if they thought the city should own the carts or not. <br /> Based on the proposals and staffs review, and taking into account the additional <br /> capital costs, Mr. Culver advised he would recommend that the contractor own <br /> the carts. Mr. Culver noted several individual Councilmembers had already <br /> expressed concerns in the city taking on additional capital costs. Mr. Culver <br /> referenced the scenario and prices. Mr. Culver advised that he would also <br /> recommend including the parks recycling component at full service. Mr. Culver <br /> opined that Proposer 3 offered a good proposal for that service for a five year <br /> contract term as a whole and including those items, and overall providing a <br /> significant value to the city. <br /> Given the increased cost for recycling inside parks, Chair Cihacek asked Mr. <br /> Culver if he had a sense of the cost potential for regular trash pick-up that may <br /> offset it. <br /> Mr. Culver advised that he did not, and was not aware of the cost to parks at this <br /> time for their trash service. Mr. Culver suggested there may be some potential <br /> savings if their trash vendor didn't have to service trash bins as frequently and if <br /> recycling removed a majority of that waste. While it may be a possibility, Mr. <br /> Culver advised he had no firm numbers to offer at this time. <br /> Member Wozniak asked if staff had a sense of the type of vendor service and <br /> outreach as per their proposals or if one was more capable of doing specific <br /> Page 13 of 19 <br />