How much should we pay for trash pick-up?
In my earlier post the focus was on the Sloan Vazquez Consulting assessment of the four trash haulers competing for our ten year contract. As consumers in this economy, while the organization and depth of any vendor must surely be weighed, the bottom line is what’s the cost.
Therefore let me provide all four bidders residential rates and a new one called “cart washing.” Yes, the city has requested that, in addition to picking up our trash, the vendor will wash our trash cans twice a year.
Residential pick up: Athens is $12.22, CR&R $10.27, Ware $11.52 and Waste Management $13.74 (as reported in part one).
Cart washing: Athens $1.25, CR&R $0.50, Ware $0.17 and Waste Management $1.55
As someone commented in part 1, the consumer cost should carry a heavier weight. He proposed 30-35% rather than the 20% as established by Sloan Vazquez. Based on the four competing bids received, that single factor has a major impact as it relates to CR&R whose residential rate is 25% lower than W/M.
“To the victors go the spoils” it is said. Our entrenched MV City Council is set to award a $1.5 million excess profit to their long time political patron, Waste Management, Inc. in appreciation for years of lining their political coffers. “Our paid consultant, Sloan – Vasquez made us do it” will be the Council excuse. “Our hands are clean.”
The slight of unclean hand will be to impose a charge of $4.00 per month on each resident for trash pick up by selecting Waste Management over the lower price of other qualified companies. Shhhhhh – no one will notice after a couple months. Great plan MV Council. Too bad for the MV Council that this sham has to be conducted in public. Tune in to Cox and watch the art of how millions in patronage changes hands in public.
Corporations have to earn a profit to pick up our rubbish, but does excess profit have to come from the household budgets of working MV residents? Answer: Yes as Sloan – Vasquez the Council’s paid puppet has covered for them.
A very interesting analysis by The Truth Teller.
I would rather see the $1.5 million put into our aging slopes and streets than the garbage folks pockets –or council members campaign funds.
A very interesting analysis by The Truth Teller.
I would rather see the $1.5 million put into our ageing slopes and streets than the garbage folks pockets –or council members campaign funds.
$1.5 million in excess profits? Based on what evidence? If that’s simply the charges over what the other haulers are proposing, that’s not profits. Have you analyzed Waste Management’s financials to come up with the $1.5 million figure? I’m skeptical. And what about quality of service? Truth or Joe, do you have any specific complaints about W/M’s service? Do you have any evidence of superior service by the other companies? My point is that if service has been consistent and trouble-free, that could warrant a little higher monthly bill over the uncertainty of a new hauler. Personally, I have no problems with W/M’s service and would be fine with them continuing service. And Joe, if you think the new hauler (if another wins) will not be contributing to all council members, you really are ignoring a political reality (right or wrong).
Mr. Gilbert, cheaper does not mean better! There’s a reason I buy my clothes from J Crew and not Wal-Mart. The quality of material and services is superior to that of Wal-Mart and worth the extra price. The city must look at the overall picture not just the costs.
I live in Dana Point and I’m not at all happy with CR&R. I feel their recycling efforts are basic and outdated. Their trucks knock over the bins after pick-up and are left scattered. We’ve contacted them about doing more in their efforts to recycle more and to do more with composting and their answer is, “we’re committed to doing more IN THE FUTURE.” I recommend Mission Viejo to not commit to CR&R if they are expecting more.
I agree with OrangeCJan. My vote is against CR&R and Ware based on their track records in OC. We should listen to the consultant’s recommendation.
While Waste Management may be more expensive, residents should take into consideration the great things they’re doing for our community.
My daughter and I frequent the Mission Viejo Library where every April Waste Management donates $5 to the library for every ton of recyclables discarded by residents. My daughter and I enjoy this program and I think it’s teaching her great lessons. And they are now teaming with Goodwill.
I know they are also working with Mission Hospital to help make the hospital green. I believe a company like this is a great compliment to our community.
I too have not heard good things about CR&R and Ware. I hear their services are poor. Regardless, I think it’s a good thing the city hired a consultant. If the city had not hired one, then everyone would have screamed they should have.
Would anyone else like to chime in on behalf of Waste Management? Sounds like either Waste Management employees have posted above or the consultant recommending Waste Management.
You don’t happen to be the “Jennifer Anderson” from the City of Dana Point’s Public Works dept are you? If so, then please again hear my complaint with CR&R. I could care less what happens in Mission Viejo. I’m not an employee or whatever else you might allege. However, I am a Dana Point taxpayer. Regardless, I did think they should hear that one of the company’s they are considering is not worth the trash they pick-up.
Marco. Community support is always a wise investment for any vendor. At times they don’t even need to make the overture. Case in point is the requirment to add art as a condition of getting approval to bring a new business into our city.
Want proof? Simply drive by Sonic burgers.
There are thousands of residents on a shrinking fixed income in which every dollar saved or spent can force them to make choices. Do I buy some necessary staples this week or pay an additional $3.70 extra just to pick up our trash.
As stated to many people I like W/M. However, there are 50,000 voters in this city who may be in a different place than we are who have that tough decision to make. And no, I will not plagerize Obama’s health care justification argument. Or is that what I just did?
OrangeCJan.
So you want our garbage trucks to be shiny Mercedez Benz as we saw in Europe?
Hello? How simple can we present this contract. Garbage is to be removed from our trash barrels in a timely fashion at a competitive cost.
I have written two posts on this topic, the first of which covered the recommendation of consultant Sloan Vazquez.
The debate is where that firm placed the highest scoring opportunities which is a critical assessment.
While you may not shop at WalMart I would opine that the vast majority of our residents do. I have never been in a J Crew shop and have no desire to keep up with the Jones’s.
The solution is easily addressed. The city council should approve a survey that includes affidavits from 500 random homeowners served by CR&R as to their performance in these surrounding communites.
Why not. We take survey’s often enough for issues that will not approach the pending $80 to $100 million 10 year exclusive contract now on the table.
And let me thank all of those supporters of Waste Management for boosting our hits and comments. That support is appreciated.
Larry, you should check to see if this sloan-vazquez company is on the take. They seem to definitely favor the incumbent. You do see my point about the price being lower by CRR because they are offering 20% less equipment should not rank them as the low bidder. Its not apples to apples. They should bid it the way everyone else did to see what the correct pricing would be. I don’t consider them the lowest bidder because of that reason, and in fact they should be disqualified for not bidding the correct way. If they wanted to submit an alternative proposal then thats different. I guarantee that if everyone else bid the contract with 20% less equipment and labor then it would be a whole different ball game. Fair is fair. They are not the low bidder. In that case it should go to the second low bidder which I think is Ware Disposal. I know you guys at the Juice would love that one.
Larry, any new updates regarding the contract negotiations? Overall, I’m still suspect of any company with such a lowball bid. I cannot imagine that if CR&R is offering the same services as WM, their operating costs cannot be that much cheaper. I’ve checked out their website and cannot figure it out. Do they pay their employees in pennies? Do they hire illegals?
I’d like to know how much these smaller outfits reinvest into the community? Which firm will get us to zero waste faster? Again, this is goes beyond just picking-up our garbage.
Joe, Larry,
Why don’t you two move onto the next issue in the city? Obviously trash is too complicated for you to figure out. I didn’t see either of you at the last meeting. If you would have been there then you would have seen the “reasonableness” behind the 1.5m variance between WM and CRR. Case in point, your boys at CRR bid MV at 25k residents. The RFP clearly stated 29,791 residents. So, your guys (CRR) can’t even read an RFP properly let alone do math. Given they underbid the city by 3 routes / Trucks which equates to $720,000 and then they OVER Bid the value of the recycled material by $500k. To inform you of valuation of recycled material….it’s tied to an index or market demand. Presently recycled material isn’t doing so well. So, the 1.5 million dollar variance between the two companies has just been shortened considerably (720k + 500k = 1.2 million). I am sure WM will meet the city on the difference. Now, onto franchise fees. You do know that these fees are paid by the hauler to the city predicated upon the agreement price? I know it took your gal Cathly Schlicht about 5 hours the other night to figure that one out but I think she realized the “value” in WM versus a “low ball” price. The franchise fee is 5% paid to MV off WM’s price compared to 5% paid off CRR’s price. Now do a little simple math and again the gap has been shortened between the two companies with additional revenue going to the city to beautify “Your Streets”. When you say “it’s all about price” please take into consideration ALL the factors not the number at the bottom of the ledger. How about you water your lawn ONE (1) less day a month and then you will have enough money to pay for your trash bill (which is in the bottom 25% of the county now and will go down by 8% from present cost if WM wins the bid). What’s that?? Move onto measure “D” boys trash seems to be like Calculus 2 for you – quite difficult to understand.
It sure looks like Waste Management is commenting here again…
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2010/05/waste-management-has-developed-quite-an-interest-in-the-orange-juice-blog/
Art, it looks like you aren’t a numbers guy. The numbers don’t lie….if you have ever looked at a balance sheet your perception wouldn’t be as skewed.
Alan,
Numbers do lie. It depends on who is submitting them.
I don’t trust anything that comes out of Waste Management. You clearly are ignoring their long, sordid history.
Art, seriously, are you looking at the same data the rest of us are? I don’t work for WM rather, I am a pragmatic businessman living in this fine city. Do you honestly think that a company with access to the same products as the rest can do the job with a 20% less cost? If you do, I want to sell you ocean front property in Arizona. Does an extra dollar a month limit your ability to see the real truth? Let me say it again, FRANCHISE FEE’s. The city get 5% of the agreed annual price. In the long run you will see less improvements in the city if you take a low ball price. The myopic vision of some, small faction of residents (yourself) kills me. I don’t know you but am guessing you are retired with nothing better to do. Palm Springs just called and is looking for a few good people with more idle time than a real estate agent. Get with the times and look at the numbers. Remember…”you pay for what you get”, there is nothing worse than becoming a victim because you don’t have the ability to see the forrest through the trees.
Alan Moates. As a newcomber to the Juice please address your comments to the person who wrote the story or comments. Art is not the author of this post nor does he live in MV.
Franchise fees. A good thing for those of us who are truly fiscal conservatives. If every impacted homeowner and business owner ends up paying a higher cost the city will get more money. Is that your plan for the city to get money out of everyone’s piggy bank when they are not aware of the contract terms.
While you are at it perhaps you can have the city modify it’s contract with COX Communications and add a franchise fee to their service where none exists today. Yes, there is a fee on TV but none of their Internet or phone charges. Is that your solution to get more money into the city coffers so that we can enter another float in the Rose Parade next year?
Is part of the lower cost from CR&R, and possibly others, due to their use of non union drivers?
W/M had the highest cost of all four bidders. Oh. I’m sorry. You wish to ignore that minor detail.
Oh, lastly, submitting is a key word here. Thank you for bringing that up. Nothing like submitting a bid with a total population count of 25k residents. The actual amount here is 30k. Why is there a 5k difference? Oh, that’s right…”Depends on who is submitting the numbers” (your quote). Again, you must not be a numbers guy. I suppose you short pay your house payment every month out of principle? I hope your CPA is on retainer because if he were to charge you by the hour he would be an extremely rich man.