Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cape Coral weighs extending Waste Pro contract or launching RFP as collection rates climb
Summary
City staff outlined two main options to the Cape Coral City Council for solid‑waste collection: a negotiated early extension with Waste Pro that would sharply raise resident assessments or an 18‑month RFP process that could avoid a single large increase but carries transition risks.
City staff presented a detailed review of Cape Coral’s solid-waste collection contract and two options for how to proceed after council-directed negotiations with current contractor Waste Pro during the Committee of the Whole on Feb. 26.
Solid Waste Manager Terry Schweitzer told council the city’s long-running franchise contract with Waste Pro began in 2010 and, after multiple amendments, currently runs to Sept. 30, 2027. The city has grown from roughly 59,000 households under that contract in 2010 to more than 94,000 today. Schweitzer said staff negotiated service and accountability improvements with Waste Pro and outlined two takeover paths: an early extension or a new procurement.
Under the early-extension option, Schweitzer said residential assessments would jump from about $13.72 per month now to either $23.63 or $26.56 per month beginning Oct. 1, 2025, depending on which negotiated path the council accepts; commercial rates would rise as well. Schweitzer presented the tradeoffs: the higher residential rate option would include removing an $8,000 monthly payment method rebate and would come with stronger contractual service standards and penalties. Waste Pro’s Bill Jones said publicly he expects the company to invest in fleet upgrades and agreed the negotiated extension would bring the contract to industry standards.
If council chose an RFP instead, Schweitzer said staff would need to start the procurement immediately — he estimated 18 months to run the consultant-assisted RFP, evaluate proposals and give a vendor time to transition — and projected new rates in 2027 of about $25–$30 per household. He estimated the city currently pays roughly $16 million annually under the existing franchise terms; with expected CPI increases through 2027, he said the city should expect a multi‑year increase regardless of path taken.
The staff-negotiated service improvements and increased accountability included same‑day resolution for calls reported before noon, six-day tote delivery, faster spillage response (five‑hour initial response with 10 days for clean‑up in non‑extraordinary circumstances), tighter penalties for missed routes and missed collections, requirements for morning route schedules and an end‑of‑day route status report to help reconciliation and 311 responses. Schweitzer also recommended enhanced transparency: morning schedules, non‑collection logs and monthly call reports to aid city inspectors in reconciling disposal bills and routes.
Council members repeatedly raised two themes: (1) concerns about rate shock to residents if an extension with a large immediate increase is accepted, and (2) concerns about transition risk if the city issues an RFP and a new contractor faces start‑up problems. Councilmember Nelson (Donnell) and some colleagues stressed resident affordability and the benefits of competition; other council members pointed to service stability and Waste Pro’s local experience, including recent hurricane responses. Bill Jones for Waste Pro said the company plans roughly $6.5 million in local capital spending this year for fleet improvements and that an extension reduces transition risk.
Multiple councilmembers asked for more local comparators (for example, Port St. Lucie), and Schweitzer agreed to provide additional detail on nearby cities’ recent contract results and rates. Several councilmembers then signaled support for pursuing an RFP; others favored negotiating an extension with stricter service standards. No formal binding vote was recorded during the meeting; the City Manager told council staff would return with draft documents depending on council direction.
Schweitzer’s recommendation summary to council: if cost containment is the priority, initiate an RFP for a new contract beginning fiscal year 2028; if service improvements and immediate contractual accountability are priority, accept an amended extension but note the large short‑term rate increase. Several council members emphasized they expect any path chosen to include measurable reporting and enforcement provisions.
