2019_1007_CCPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

35 Attachment A shows revenue sharing payments/cost sharing expenses since January of 2006. As 36 stated above, from 2006 through 2017 the City received over $919,000 in revenue from its recycled 37 material. Since January of 2018, the City has paid over $84,000 in cost sharing. 38 Given the significant increases in the additional monthly costs to cover the processing costs, staff 39 contacted Eureka about pricing options if the City were to remove the monthly risk associated with 40 the current commodity market and the revenue share. Eureka provided a $1.00/dwelling unit/month 41 increase (for 2019 an increase from $2.46 to $3.46). The City currently has 15,755 units, which 42 equates to $189,060 in increased base service cost for 2019. The increased cost for 2020 would be 43 $192,841 afterthe 2% annual escalator. In the 2020 proposed budget, this actually would equate to a 44 $120,841 increase given an additional budgeted line item of $72,000 for costs related to 45 Revenue/Cost Share. Through August of 2019, the City has paid Eurekaroughly $49,000 to cover 46 processing costs that historically were paid for by the revenue share. 47 Looking at recent contracts that metro area cities have entered into over the past 18 months, we are 48 seeing some dramatic cost increases in the per unit per month costs. Examples from Fridley’s and 49 Edina’s recent RFP process are shown in Attachment B, Tables 4 and 5. Edina and Fridley both 50 selected Republic Services for their recycling services. Edina, who went through their RFP process 51 in 2019, is now paying $3.59 per unit per month, which is $1.09 more than our 2020 contractual 52 price and $0.06 per unit per month higher than what Eureka proposed to remove the Revenue/Cost 53 share model. 54 The City of Maplewood also just awarded a six-year contract to Tennis Sanitation for Recycling 55 Services. Staff was not able to find a comparison of rates from all of the proposals Maplewood 56 received (includingEureka, Republic, Waste Management and Walters) but the contract price for 57 City owned carts without revenue sharing is $4.50 per unit per month for 2020, increasing by $0.25 58 per year (5.5% for the second year) for the term of the contract. 59 The current contract with Eureka will expire at the end of 2021. The contract did have a provision to 60 extend the contract up to two additional years (2022 and 2023). It is possible that if the City was 61 open to extending the contract, Eureka may negotiate some lower rates in order to remove the 62 Revenue/Cost sharing model. Also, staff would try to negotiate a restart of the revenue sharing or at 63 the very least a reduction in the per unit cost if the revenue for recyclable materials recovered over 64 the remaining term ofthe contract (some benchmark would be established for the reduction in cost). 65 Staff would like some direction from Council on if we should explore this route or simply let the 66 current contract expire and request new proposals in 2021 for a new contract at the start of 2022. 67 P OLICY O BJECTIVE 68 Policy 6.4 of the Roseville 2030 Comprehensive Plan states: Support citywide recycling, 69 reduction, and reuse of waste materials for both residential properties and businesses. 70 F INANCIAL I MPACTS 71 As of the end of August, the City has spent approximately $49,000 more on recycling processing 72 than budgeted for 2019. We anticipate the final overrun on processing will be approximately 73 $75,000 at the end of the year. The current 2020 budget for recycling assumes an additional $72,000 74 ($6000 per month) for recycling processing costs. The current proposed Recycling Fee for 2020 is 75 $9.00 per unit per quarter (an increase from the current $7.15 per quarter). With the 2020 budget 76 and the $9.00 fee, we anticipate a surplus of $10,280. Increasing the fee to $9.50 would result in a 77 surplus of $41,669. A $10 fee would result in an anticipated surplus of $73,119. 78 The current proposal from Eureka Recycling to eliminate the Revenue/Cost Sharing model would Page 2 of 3