Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Landfill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners weigh buying larger compactor, request bids for landfill attachments
Summary
City staff and commissioners discussed options to extend life of the Tucumcari landfill, including purchasing a larger compactor (new or used), warranty terms, financing options and pursuing an RFP for an attachment system; motions were made but no final vote is recorded in the transcript.
City staff and commissioners discussed replacing the city’s compactor and pursuing an attachment (torch/roller) to extend the life of the Tucumcari landfill, with staff warning the site has only a few years of capacity left.
The discussion centered on two procurement paths: buy a larger new compactor with a multi‑year warranty and finance it over 60–96 months, or purchase a used, larger machine offered with a two‑year warranty and 6,000 hours. A staff presenter said the facility is “about 2 years ahead of schedule” in filling and that a larger compactor could extend the landfill’s life to five or six years, giving more time to seek design and construction funds.
The city discussed vendor warranty and local maintenance. One speaker noted a local dealer would handle on‑site maintenance and swap in a replacement machine during repairs. Commissioners and staff raised budget concerns: lease/finance payment differences across 60, 84 and 96‑month terms, the potential long‑term cost of a tariff tied payment plan, and whether the city should purchase a used machine to lower up‑front cost.
Commissioners also discussed an attachment (described as a weighted torch/roller) that would mount to the compactor to improve daily cover and wind resistance; a staff estimate put that attachment at about $8,086,000 and would require an RFP because it is not on state contract.
One commissioner made a motion to purchase an “E520 used … with the 2‑year warranty.” Later in the discussion a separate motion was made to move forward with an “H380” (non‑tariff unit) on an 84‑month financing plan and to proceed with an RFP for the attachment; the transcript records the motions but does not record final vote tallies or an explicit adoption in the posted excerpts.
Next steps discussed included: clarifying tariff/availability with the vendor, confirming warranty and maintenance commitments from the local dealer, preparing an RFP for the attachment (the staff presenter asked for approval to pursue an RFP), and assembling a financing plan tied to the landfill enterprise account. Commissioners also asked staff to provide a clearer financial analysis before final purchase approval.
