Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Orchard reviews options for next garbage contract as current agreement nears expiration
Summary
City staff outlined three paths — open RFP, renegotiate with current provider Waste Management, or adopt Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) regulated rates — and council asked for comparative analysis and a first offer from Waste Management before deciding.
Port Orchard staff briefed the City Council on May 27 about options for the city’s solid-waste contract as the current Waste Management agreement nears the end of its final extension. Staff presented three options: (1) issue a public request for proposals (RFP) and pursue a new vendor, (2) renegotiate directly with the incumbent (Waste Management), or (3) adopt Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) regulated solid-waste rates.
City staff outlined the practical challenges of option 1, including the need for new compactor trucks (estimated lead time one to two years and a capital cost staff estimated at roughly $2 million for three to four trucks), procurement and distribution of residential and commercial containers, and staffing and facilities to operate a collection fleet. "Not every vendor out there is going to have the trucks available to use the compactor trucks," staff said.
Option 2 — renegotiating with Waste Management — would preserve continuity and the existing operational setup but staff warned negotiated rates are expected to increase and Waste Management reportedly does not want to provide certain city services for free (for example, municipal facility pickups previously included in the contract). Option 3 would shift rate-setting to the UTC; staff noted UTC-regulated rates offer transparency and stability but reduce local control and could eliminate city-negotiated value-added services (like spring cleanup or municipal facility pickups) unless the city separately funds them.
Council members asked staff to provide a concise comparison focused on the typical residential customer (standard can and standard rate) and to return with: (a) a first written proposal from Waste Management for a negotiated extension/renewal; and (b) an estimate of the effect on a standard residential account under UTC-regulated rates. Several councilors said an RFP might be impractical given local market capacity and truck lead times; others asked staff to seek a four-month extension if needed to avoid service disruption while council completes the analysis.
Staff agreed to email the detailed service list and to bring back comparative figures, market context (what surrounding jurisdictions pay), and a Waste Management proposal. Council emphasized protecting current municipal services and minimizing disruptions to residents.
