1979 06 28CITY OF MOSES LAKE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
2868
CONTINUED COUNCIL MEETING
June 28,1979
CONFERENCE ROOM/CITY HALL
8:00 P.M.
Members Present:Don Swanson,Bob Hill,Stephen Shinn,Jim Barney,and Barry
Ziegler.Absent -Kent Jones and Eric Skaug
This meeting was a continuation of the City Council regular session of June 26,
1979.The Mayor has requested that a one item agenda on the Solid Waste
Collection Contract be continued so that the Council would have an opportunity
to devote more time to this particular item.
Mr.Hill expressed his concern about the landfill which is operated by Grant
County.He said discussion had been held regarding of where the county is
going and where we are going.He stated the RCW's say that the landfill must
be inside the city limits.If the City could get the old land site back the
City could annex.The City could possibly consider getting the old landfill.
He stated that he felt city staff and Council have not been deli gent on this
issue.
Jim Barney asked if the City could annex the property if the City does not own
the property.
Mr.Hill replied that the Council could take action and annex it.
City Manager,Doug Zenor,stated that if the Council desired,he could look into
the possibility of establishing our own landfill.
Acting Public Works Director,M.G.McLanahan,stated that was one of the things
he had explored in talking to the Department of Ecology and the State Game
Department.They stated they would be reluctant to give the City permission
to go back to managing their own landfill.The DOE has subsidized the County
90%,and it would be almost an impossibility to give the City of Moses Lake any
support.Unless the city and county would completely "butt heads",then they
would make a dicision.Mr.Zenor and he had requested records from Grant
County and they had promised them in 2 - 3 weeks,but the City hasn't received
any yet.Mr.McLanahan informed them that he had to have these figures so that
he would know what they were going to charge the City.
Mr.Hill expressed concern that the County was not living up to the terms of
the contract.The County had agreed to furnish the City with records and they
have failed to comply with this portion of the contract,and he did not like
that.
Mayor Swanson asked when the contract with the County expires?Mr.Zenor answered
that it was near the end of the year.The contract expires on November 15,1979.
He had communicated with the engineer and had been informed that they had the new
contract proposal with amendments.Mr.Zenor requested that the reports pursuant
to contract be received before the contract expiration date.
Mr.Shinn requested that the County be asked to have the reports by August 1st.
He felt that if the County needed the Council to ask for the reports,he would
make a motion that the Council is requesting these reports by August 1st,the
motion was seconded by Mayor Swanson and unanimously passed.
Mr.Shinn questioned that the references to the specifications and instructions
were not attached with Mr.Zenor replied that the contract is all on one document
instead of with attachments.
The Councilmen reviewed all the contract.There were no changes in the
Invitation for Bids,and no changes in Instruction to Bidders.
Mr.Hill asked about the residential rates that were listed at 3 - 5 cans per
weekly service.He stated that in his particular situation he would have one
can from September through May,but from May through September (the summer months)
he would have anywhere from 3 to 8 cans.
2869
CONTINUED COUNCIL MEETING
Page 2
June 28,1979
The Councilmen discussed variable pick up at some residences.There is also
the situation where on one block there would be some homes that would need one
or two can pick up continuously,and 4-5 cans at some residences continually.
The garbage collectors would have a hard time billing if there was an option of
whether a home would be entitled to a 3-can or 5-can pick up,and there would be
difficulty in the billing system.
Mr.McLanahan stated that if there was a 3-can or 5-can pick up option that most
people would request the 3-can.There should also be a 6-month minimum period
to subscribe to the 3 or 5 can option,if you chose that,or they will be
changing the pick up to 5 cans for the summer months,and 3 cans for the winter
months,and it would mean alot of book work for the computer and utility clerks.
Mr.Zenor was concerned that if you go for the either 3-can or 5-can pick up
that the bidder will be bidding on the higher 5-can pick up.
Mr.Barney stated that the Council could send the proposal out with a 4-can
pick up.Mr.Hill asked how many people would exceed the 3-can pick up.
Mr.McLanahan stated that there would be between 300-400 that would go to the
5-can pick up.Mr.Zenor stated that the current average is 2.8 to 3.1 cans.
Mayor Swanson asked if the bidder would bid on the 3 or 5 cans separately?Mr.
McLanahan answered that he would.
Mr.Zenor suggested that Council could revise the 3-can or 5-can concept and get
a combination.
Mr.McLanahan stated that there could be alternates,say 3,000 at 3 cans and
3,000 at 5 cans.On the drop boxes for the downtown business area we are
actually paying more to Grant County then the City is taking in for revenue
over and above the 70%,so Meling's charges,and the charges to the County are
being subsidized.
Mr.Shinn stated that some businesses were not allowed to use two cans,that
when they requested two cans,Meling told them that they had to go to a drop
box.Mr.McLanahan stated that he should be told about statements like that so
that he can check on it,he was not aware of that.
Mr.Hill questioned the billing of a business that had a small business in the
same building,and just one can of garbage,he was also concerned with billing
for the Broadway Building.Mr.McLanahan replied that if they have one meter
they should have one billing.In a trailer court you have one meter,so there
is only one billing.Mayor Swanson then inquired if the billing was per
license or per meter.Mr.McLanahan said it was per meter.
Mr.Zenor asked if the Council wanted 3-can or 5-can option,or as suggested,
4 cans?Mr.Ziegler said that he would like to go for a 4-can bid.
Mr.McLanahan will change the Proposal to reflect the 4-can bid.
There were no changes to the Contract or the Performance Bond.
Under Specifications -General Description GP 1-1:The Council discussed the
70%of revenue to the contractor and 30%of revenue that -goes to the city for
billing and collection charges.Mr.Ziegler asked the reasoning for this
revenue distribution.Mr.McLanahan stated that all expenses on billing and
collection is figured into that amount,a sanitation technician's salary,and a
vehicle,office supplies,support services,computer time,utility clerk time,
portion of collection time,percent of building costs,postage,and other costs.
It costs the City a certain amount of dollars to handle the billing and
collection.Mr.Shinn asked what would happen to the billing system if they
established a base bid.Mr.Gazewood replied that the computer could handle
that.At present the program is set to handle this percentage.
Mr.Shinn:Let's go for a base bid for the proposal and not 70%to the Contractor
and 30%to the city.That way we have the option to establish the rates.If we
feel we have to spend more we could raise the rates without being tied to 30%.
Mr.Zenor stated that he never has felt comfortable with the contractor setting
the rates.
.
_
CONTINUED COUNCIL MEETING
Page 3
June 28, 1979
2870
Mr.McLanahan said that he could change that,that the contractor could bid on
that separately.
Mayor Swanson was concerned that the city was going to start something that it
was not familiar with.Mr.Shinn asked what would happen if the administrative
costs increase greatly,if we are tied to the 70%-30%?
Mr.Hill asked about uncol lectable accounts.Mr.Gazewood replied that the City
turns the account over to a collection agency and they get 50% of what they
collect,but the city absorbs the loss and the contractor gets the monthly value.
Mr.McLanahan said there has always been trouble collecting for garbage only,
unlike the water bills that is the responsibility of the property owner and
becomes a lien against the property and the water is not turned on until the
bil1 is paid in full.
Mr.Shinn asked what the gross revenue was for garbage and Mr.McLanahan stated
that a figure of $322,000 was close,but may not be to the current month.Mr.
Barney asked how about the contractor paying the County?Mr.McLanahan replied
that the contractor would have no control,and the City Council should deal with
the county,and not the contractor.
Mr.Barney stated that he had no problem with the 70%-30%split.Mr.Shinn
wondered if the City's expenses run over 30%.Mr.Ziegler stated that it would
be better all the way around in bookeeping since the overage keeps shrinking
and shrinking.
Mr.Hill made a motion that the contractor bid on his own costs,and the City
will add their operational costs,seconded by Mr.Ziegler.Vote 3 to 2,motion
carried,with Bob Hill,Stephen Shinn and Barry Ziegler voting for the motion;
and Mayor Swanson and Jim Barney voting against the motion.
Under Labor,the Public Works Director is to add a provision if the contractor
fails to perform work because of a labor dispute.
Under Workmen,the contractor shall be required to furnish employees clean
uniforms instead of coveralls.Also uniforms and lettering is to be approved
by the City.
Under Trailer Courts,they shall have a detachable container as directed by the
City and not by the "Sanitation Technician".
Under City Owned Containers,it should be understood that the city shall pay the
schedule rate of residential fees for litter and garbage cans,and the commercial
rates for containers.
Under Painting and Cleaning of Vehicles and Equipment:A sentence should be
added that the contractor should keep records of the cleaning and painting
of the vehicles and these records shall be available to the City for inspection.
Under Scope of Payment the 70%-30%ratio for the contractor to bid on the total
amount,with the contractor getting 70%and the City 30%was changed that the
contractor will bid on only that amount that he will charge,and the city will
add on its operational expenses for the administration and billing expenses.
In the last paragraph,Annual Adjustments of the Bid Proposal,it should be
changed to read:The unit prices for the various bid items shall be adjusted
in August of the second and fourth year of the Contract to become effective on
all statements mailed in September.This increase shall be a 2%increase plus
one half of the National C.P.I,for the past 12-month period.
All other parts of the Contract were approved by the Council.Mr.McLanahan
requested that the Council allow him to advertise for bids with the changes so
that he could keep his schedule and open bids on July 18,1979.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
ATTEST SWANSON, MAYOR