Title
Discussion on Transfer Station construction at the Resource Recovery Park. (PWC 6-19-18)
Body
Question presented:
Which of the following three options would Council like the City Manager to pursue?
1. Stay the course on the original design knowing there may be a funding shortfall once bids are opened; or
2. Allow Summit Waste Systems’ (SWS) proposed design change knowing there may be a funding shortfall at opening of bids. Change includes:
relocation of Transfer Station on site
in-kind work for SWS
;or
3. Council declines to appropriate additional funding and authorizes the City Manager to proceed with Transfer Station project once SWS agrees to fund all costs in excess of the proceeds from the sale of the equipment ($1.152M)
The City Manager seeks guidance from Council on the next steps to take for dealing with Transfer Station option in the operations management contract for the Resource Recovery Park and Related Facilities.
BACKGROUND:
The City decided to privatize the operations of the Resource Recovery Park (RRP) and entered into a contract on January 26, 2016 with Summit Waste Systems, LLC (“SWS”), a subsidiary of Heartland Environmental Services (“HES”) which was the successful bidder for the contract. SWS took over operations of the RRP on March 1, 2016.
The agreement provides phases for performance of obligations and payment of compensation. The agreement also provides for the possibility of constructing a Transfer Station to be owned by the City and operated by SWS. The City’s contribution was capped by the agreement to the amount the City received from the purchase of landfill equipment. SWS handled the sale of the equipment and the equipment was purchased by a third party for a net amount of $1.15 Million. The City, with input from SWS, had its outside engineering consultant partially design the TS to a point that ...
Click here for full text