Author Topic: Waste Management Trail Ridge Contract  (Read 2369 times)

stephendare

  • Guest
Waste Management Trail Ridge Contract
« on: February 23, 2009, 10:23:40 AM »
According to the Daily Record, the community is beginning to weigh in on the waste management contract:

http://jaxdailyrecord.com/citynotes.php

Quote
Several members of the Jacksonville Young Democrats have let City Council President Ronnie Fussell know they oppose awarding the Trail Ridge Landfill contract without a bidding process. They base their concerns on four criteria: financial, the long-term nature of the contract, environmental issues and transparency.

Conversely, the Northwest Citizens Planning Advisory Committee is on record as supporting Mayor John Peyton’s desire to extend the current contract with Waste Management without putting it out to bid. The civic organization voted 16-2 in favor of Peyton’s proposal

BridgeTroll

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13366
  • The average person thinks he isnt
    • London Bridge Pub
Re: Waste Management Trail Ridge Contract
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2009, 10:26:32 AM »
It looks as though the issue is finally gaining attention.  The mayor has certainly not made his case as of yet...
In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

downtownparks

  • Guest
Re: Waste Management Trail Ridge Contract
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2009, 02:22:34 PM »
The Mayor tried to make his case a few weeks ago. (Jan 29th)

Quote
Dear Friends:

After many months of negotiating a contract for the disposal of solid waste at Trail Ridge Landfill, the city has reached an agreement to extend its contract with its current landfill operator, Waste Management – a move that saves taxpayers more than $200 million. As mayor, it is my duty to seek the best deal for the taxpayers of this city, and I am convinced that this agreement with Waste Management cannot be matched.

While the Jacksonville City Council must ultimately sign off on this deal, my staff worked very hard to represent the best interests of the taxpayer while at the bargaining table. Below, I have outlined the merits of the bill currently before the council.

Garbage is big business, and although we may only think about it when the collection at our home is missed, the management of waste is critical to our community’s continued economic development. A community’s failure to manage garbage collection well, or failure to have a quality landfill operating at a competitive price, directly affects the taxpayers’ bottom line. If the city’s current landfill space reaches capacity, which it is projected to do in five to seven years, we will be forced to stop development across Jacksonville and pay more than $30 million annually to haul waste out of the county.

The current proposal supports my desire to save taxpayer money, protect the city from future liability and prevent any disruption to the disposal of waste in our community. First, the city will save about $20 million on its existing contract with Waste Management, which was initially bid in 1991. Second, Waste Management will assume all environmental liability associated with operating a landfill, saving the city more than $150 million. In addition, it will also free up more than $30 million to meet other city needs.

The city is only able to realize these savings by extending its contract with Waste Management. I have met with independent waste disposal experts, who have no vested financial interest in this deal, and they have assured me that no other company could match, much less better, the proposed contract. If council chooses to bid the contract, more than $200 million in guaranteed savings will be lost, and taxpayers will foot the bill. Likewise, if the council chooses to bid the contract, it will trigger an immediate $30 million-plus cost to close the current site.

Opponents of this deal have chosen to focus on the politics and personalities of this debate, rather than the undeniable financial benefits to the taxpayer. The deal on the table was negotiated by city engineers who have years of environmental and landfill experience – not politicians, lawyers or public relations agents. If our opponents’ lobbyists are successful in clouding the rhetoric with scare tactics and misrepresentation, it will not only cost taxpayers millions of dollars, but Jacksonville could also be faced with a future landfill crisis that could shut down growth and development in our city.

I cannot, in good conscience, let that happen on my watch.

Respectfully,

John Peyton

Mayor


BridgeTroll

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13366
  • The average person thinks he isnt
    • London Bridge Pub
Re: Waste Management Trail Ridge Contract
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2009, 02:49:54 PM »
Not sure what happened to this thread.  Peyton still has not made his case...

Quote
First, the city will save about $20 million on its existing contract with Waste Management,

Why and how?

Quote
Second, Waste Management will assume all environmental liability associated with operating a landfill, saving the city more than $150 million.

Why would the same requirement not be made of another company?

Quote
Likewise, if the council chooses to bid the contract, it will trigger an immediate $30 million-plus cost to close the current site.

Once again... Why?

In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

Ocklawaha

  • Phd. Ferroequinology
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10437
  • Monster of Mobility! Ocklawaha is Robert Mann
    • LIGHT RAIL JACKSONVILLE
Re: Waste Management Trail Ridge Contract
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2009, 03:41:38 PM »
Mayor Peyton, "Why garbage is my business, Y'all!"

OCKLAWAHA
NOT one of the good ol boys