Sunflower County residents are unhappy because their garbage is piling up, and that prompted the county leaders to again talk trash last week during a special call meeting of the Sunflower County Board of Supervisors.
In that session on Thursday morning, the lawmakers discussed what to do about remedying the problems with the county's garbage collection service.
County Administrator Fred Washington had been tasked with determining the feasibility of the county discontinuing its arrangement with Waste Pro USA, not contracting with another company and just doing the garbage collection themselves using county personnel.
Washington proposed establishing a two-year pilot program to the county lawmakers; wherein they would purchase two used garbage trucks, a sufficient number of 96-gallon plastic carts and provide salaries for four employees, plus related expenses, all at roughly an annual cost of $305,360.
After a discussion that yielded several questions from the members and upon a motion by District 1 Supervisor Glenn Donald and a second by District 3 Supervisor Ben Gaston, the proposal was approved unanimously.
According to Washington, there are currently 2,127 county residents who pay $13.25 per month for trash collection, but they have not been happy over recent months, either because in some cases their garbage has not been picked up at all or in other cases not on a consistent schedule.
For residential and commercial pickup, Waste Pro is currently being paid $29,416.41 monthly for a total of $352,996.92 annually.
The company has come under fire from the residents and the lawmakers because of the aforementioned performance issues. And in April, the county lawmakers stated their intent to submit a notice to Waste Pro declaring a breach of contract because of them.
The county leaders also decided to advertise and accept new proposals for trash pickup service and at their May 17 meeting, they opened the submitted bids and became aware that they would need the services of two different providers, one for residential containers and one for commercial dumpster type containers.
Arrow Disposable Services Incorporated, one of only two bidders, only handles residential pickup and Waste Management, Inc, the other bidder, only submitted pricing for commercial pickup. Waste Pro did not bid. ADSI’s submission showed an increase of $5.86 per household over what is currently being paid to Waste Pro.
That combined with Waste Management’s cost for the county’s commercial sites equated to an additional $12,458.41 a month, which means a $149,500.92 additional charge annually. That would bring the overall annual cost to the county a whopping $502,497.84. “That's a tremendous increase of going from what we currently have to what was proposed in our bids on May 17,” said Washington.
In his proof of concept, Washington estimated a startup cost of $195,000 including the purchase of two used 26-yard garbage trucks the cost to transport those trucks from Texas and the cost to purchase 2,500 96-gallon plastic carts.
Included in Washington's proposal was the projected annual cost of $305,360 for the operation, which included salaries for four employees, fuel costs to operate the trucks, regular maintenance, the cost to dispose at the landfill and insurance on the vehicles.
Gaston then asked if those figures included benefits for the employees and Washington said it did not. "Since we're $47,000 under what we currently pay, we have some wiggle room to address the benefit package," he said.
Gaston said even with figuring in at least 10% for employee benefits, dividing the startup cost over two years and adding in the extra charge to have waste management pick up the commercial containers as Donald had suggested, they would still come in cheaper than the combined proposals they have.
Washington informed the members that they have been using a borrowed truck to do what Waste Pro has not been doing. "Over the last week we've been doing this, we've been picking up our own garbage with the assistance of the city of Moorhead. They allowed us to use their (garbage) truck, it's kind of an extra (garbage) truck that they have. It was in the shop and it had been repaired, it was already paid for and they allowed us to use it."
He added that over a four-day period they had already collected more than 33 tons of trash, for a cost of about $1,500. "If we prove that this could work then we could consider buying new trucks if we needed to go that route. But, at least we can do this pilot program and not go into full debt."
Washington said at the end of the two years they could either continue what they have or consider taking bids again.
Gaston had several other questions including one related to a reference Washington made about taking out a short-term loan to purchase the equipment. Donald also offered his thoughts on how the purchases could be handled through the road department funds.
Chancery Clerk Gloria McIntosh said, "I think it can be worked out without borrowing." That thread of discussion activated a comment from Attorney Johnny McWilliams who introduced information regarding the American Recovery Program funds that will be available to the county; and he suggested that there might be provisions within those guidelines to use some of those funds for purchases and salaries.
It was mentioned that Waste Pro had declared that some of their issues regarding service were COVID related. "One thing that is definitely in here is that you can spend monies on anything that you can relate to COVID," McWilliams said.
He mentioned public safety and public health and suggested that they keep the matter away from the road department categories and more so toward COVID-19. "I don't think it's really so much of a stretch to say that when your garbage doesn't get picked up, then all of a sudden you got a matter of public health," McWilliams said.
With regards to the purchase of the 96-gallon carts, they also discussed bid requirements as it relates to governmental purchases and McWilliams said that there were certain provisions that would allow them to bypass the bidding process when it's done through a governmental auction.
McWilliams also said he was hoping it could be worked out whereby the county would not have to go out and buy 2,200 new carts, but purchase those that were distributed by Waste Pro. Gaston inquired about the feasibility of buying the Waste Pro containers and Washington expressed that he has had some difficulty getting in touch with the company.
"We need to try to figure out how much money do we think we've spent that we should not have spent and what is the value of their carts," McWilliams said. He mentioned that it might have some validity in a settlement about the carts.
The initial focus will be on picking up residential trash first and then be concerned about commercial pickup later although Washington said one of the trucks that he anticipates purchasing will have the ability to pick up both carts and dumpsters.
In addition to the discussion regarding financing Gaston also asked if Washington had worked out the logistical portion that deals with routing. He said, "Have you got a good feel on how the routing ought to be done so we can consistently pick up residential garbage in the county in a timely manner on a regular schedule? Washington affirmed that he already has a routing plan.
Although Gaston said the final costs might be slightly higher than what Washington originally presented, he alluded to it being a good idea for the county to collect their own garbage. "At least we can control our actions and when we get cussed out by the residents it's our own fault and not somebody else's fault," he said.
Gaston added, "From my perspective it makes sense to do it."
Washington presumes that they will be able to start the program by June 15 using the carts that are still in place.
Gloria Dickerson questioned the swiftness of the June 15 startup day and asked if that was enough time. Washington said, "It is an aggressive ordeal, but the road department has been filling in and doing it for the most part." He said the road department has been using a small dump truck and a backhoe in addition to the borrowed garbage truck. Washington stated that Waste Pro’s contract calls for them to continue until the county says otherwise.
As to the future of Waste Pro’s contract with the county, it still hangs in the balance. Washington said the company has not complied with his request for a schedule of when and where they will be picking up. The county is still paying invoices to Waste Pro and will discuss the matter further at their June 7 meeting.
In other business,
The members approved a request from Judge Carol White-Richard, presented by Circuit Clerk Carolyn Hamilton, to purchase additional equipment for the courtroom to be used for Zoom court sessions. "Because a lot of our witnesses are not feeling comfortable with COVID still being rampant," Hamilton said.
She stated that this purchase was in addition to the equipment that was already procured earlier in the year and that the monies are reimbursable through the Supreme Court.
Washington also introduced an announcement from the health department stating that they have permission to reopen to the public on July 1.
They have to start sanitation processes and the director wants to increase certain employees’ pay from $8 to $10 per hour.
McIntosh said that it was a budget item and should not be decided now; however, Donald said the money could be taken out of their COVID-19 funds, which McIntosh indicated they did not have.
No decision was made, but McWilliams did spend some time going through the provisions for spending the COVID-19 money and summarized how it could possibly be used.
