Councilman Buckwalter has posted a presentation by J. P. Mascaro, Inc. See Mascaro's Q&A.
I think that some of Mascaro’s points are well taken; others less so.
My thoughts:
Low Bidder – Yes, Mascaro was the low bidder. It was also the high bidder. It was the only bidder. When there’s only one bid, do you have confidence in the bidding process?
Fixed Price for Five Years – A legitimate point.
Containers per Collection – Whether the limit is ten (Mascaro) or five (Borough) is probably more of a theoretical than a practical concern for most trash customers. What is much more of a concern is that under the suggested PAYT system, the pricing is established based on an estimate of TWO bags per week. Therefore, anyone who disposes of the present weekly limit of five containers will be paying 2.5 times as much in weekly charges.
Bulk items – Included (Masacaro), separate–fee and by appointment (Borough). A legitimate difference to consider.
Yard Waste – Six per year (Mascaro) versus two (Borough). Another legitimate difference. Of course, you can track down the Borough’s conveniently parked trucks and engage in DIY disposal.
Pricing – Fixed price (Mascaro) versus probably increasing price (Borough) must be considered. But, Mascaro’s annual price of $1.388 million is a big (about 90%) uptick from the $730K they charged in 2004. Also, the $574K annual price of the 1999–2001 contract went to $730K in the 2002–2004 contract, a 27% increase. To be fair, we should expect a larger step up at the end of a multi-year fixed price deal.
Liability and Workers’ Compensation – These are both just insurance cost issues. Obviously the insurance costs go away if we use a contractor. Environmental liability is probably not as clear-cut.
Equipment Costs and Availability – A larger fleet operation should be more easily able to provide substitute collection trucks without disruption.
Transition Issues – If the Borough goes to a contractor, disposal of the present equipment is an issue. Employment of the present sanitation staff is also an issue: we might be looking at unemployment compensation claims.
Share your thoughts as comments or with your Council Member.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
If you were to add the price Mascaro charged over the 6 year period you quote, you'd find that a household over that period would have experienced, on average a 5% increase in their trash charges. Actually, that is a wrong calculation, because if the number of service households increased in the borough - which is likely - then the rate per househould for the lump sum contract would actually have gone up by an even smaller percentage.
The record of the borough to date is an increase per annum of around 18.25% for trash services.
Borough employee salaries have gone up at well over the approximately 3.5% annnual inflation rate which has remained pretty steady. Health insurance costs have surely risen at a faster rate. Fuel prices have risen at a faster rate. There is just no way the borough can compete on price.
A short term hit in a few employees laid off is not equivalent to the long term hit of employees collecting pensions.
Post a Comment