Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Landfill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Macon County rejects landfill construction bids; commissioners direct rebid and revised contractor prequalification
Summary
Bids to build Phase 3 Cell 2 of the Macon County landfill exceeded the county’s budget. The board voted 5-0 to reject the bids, adopt revised contractor prequalification guidance and rebid the project while staff pursues an interim hauling RFP and financial analysis.
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Landfill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Macon County Board of Commissioners voted 5-0 to reject the bids it received for construction of Phase 3 Cell 2 at the county landfill and to reissue the solicitation with revised contractor prequalification criteria. The decision came after county solid-waste staff and the county manager presented capacity forecasts, cost estimates and a set of options that included building a larger cell, building a smaller cell (Cell 2A) or developing a transfer station and hauling waste out of county.
Interim Solid Waste Director Jamie Fecoupe walked the board through recent capacity estimates and the bids received in August. The county’s analysis showed Phase 2 lateral expansion could reach capacity as early as July 2026 based on recent tonnage trends, and that full Phase 3 buildout would provide roughly 25 years of capacity under conservative assumptions. Bids received for the full Phase 3 Cell 2 construction exceeded preproject estimates; the lowest responsive construction bid reported to the board was about $10.3 million (construction only).
Fecoupe presented three options: (1) build the full Phase 3 Cell 2 (larger cell with roughly eight to 10 years of capacity but lower cost per cubic yard), (2) build a smaller Cell 2A (estimated to provide about 3.8 years of additional capacity and higher per-cubic-yard cost), or (3) build a transfer station and haul waste out of county. She also noted equipment needs for continued landfill operation and future cells — roughly $2.5 million for a compactor, a dozer and a recycling baler — and warned that equipment costs would raise needed tipping fees if financed.
Using the county’s estimates, constructing the larger Cell 2 would require an estimated increase in tipping fees in the range of $15 per ton (or roughly $16 increase to the availability fee) to cover additional annual debt service; the smaller Cell 2A carried a higher per-ton impact under certain financing assumptions. An out-of-county transfer alternative using a nearby jurisdiction’s rates was estimated at roughly $62–$80 per ton in straight disposal and hauling costs (estimates based on another county’s current contract), but Fecoupe cautioned that actual hauling bids for Macon County could be higher because distances are greater.
After discussion, Commissioner Joshua Young moved — and Commissioner Shields seconded — a motion to reject all previous bids on Phase 3 Cell 2 due to financial constraints, to rebid the project and to adopt revised contractor prequalification guidance to broaden potential bidders. The motion passed 5-0. Commissioners directed staff to issue an RFP for hauling and to work with consultants (including Davenport & Associates) on a financial/business plan to present options for fee adjustments, capital financing and interim hauling if necessary. Staff said rebidding and revised prequalification could add about six weeks to the procurement timeline and noted bids were valid through Nov. 3.
What this means: rejecting and rebidding the project buys time to refine scope, adjust contractor qualifications to encourage competition, obtain hauling cost quotes and develop a balanced financing plan for construction and equipment. County staff warned that if no timely construction is under way, the county will face either hauling costs or the need to build a smaller cell sooner than preferred.
Next steps: staff will rebid with revised prequalification requirements, solicit hauling proposals, and work with consultants to develop a multi-year capital and fee plan for the board’s consideration; staff estimated updated hauling cost proposals could be available by the October meeting.

