Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Contract Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fresno council approves contested amendment to city—s waste services agreement amid procurement concerns
Summary
The City Council approved a sixth amendment to the Orange Avenue Disposal services agreement tied to a pending settlement. Debate focused on whether the change bypassed competitive procurement and on the settlement—s terms; the motion passed 6-1.
The Fresno City Council on Nov. 20 approved a contested sixth amendment to the services agreement with Orange Avenue Disposal, a longtime contractor for waste services, by a 6-1 vote.
Council debate centered on the contract—s procurement history, the city—s legal exposure and the connection between the amendment and a negotiated settlement. Council Vice President Miguel Arias and other members questioned why a multi-decade relationship dating to the early 2000s had not been rebid more recently and whether the amendment sets a precedent allowing vendors to secure extensions by filing or threatening litigation.
"This vendor is uniquely positioned to continue to increase rates for residents across the city," Council Vice President Arias said, explaining his opposition. He said he would oppose the item on principle because continuous extensions inhibit market competition.
City staff and the city attorney—s office told council the amendment is tied to a settlement and that legal review indicated the city was exposed to liability without the settlement terms; the city manager said the settlement-related language and the limited circumstances under which a vendor may seek further adjustments were negotiated with counsel. City staff also noted earlier contract amendments (the fifth amendment in 2020 extended contractual terms under prior actions) and described the concession as part of a resolution of the parties— dispute.
The amendment would extend Orange Avenue Disposal—s agreement by one year beyond the current contract term and includes narrowly drafted language describing limited circumstances (for example, changes in state law imposing new legal requirements) under which the contractor could request additional compensation. City staff said those requests would not automatically be approved and would be subject to review.
Councilmember Maxwell, who said he had received positive constituent feedback about the vendor—s services in his district, supported the extension, citing continuity of service for parks and city lots. "I will be supporting this item today," Maxwell said.
The council voted to approve the amendment, 6-1, with Vice President Arias recording the lone opposition. Council members stressed the approval does not automatically increase rates and that any future cost adjustments would be subject to review and potential council approval. The city attorney said final settlement documents were not yet fully executed at the time of the hearing.
Next steps: staff will finalize any outstanding settlement details and process required administrative actions; the contract will remain subject to future competitive procurement requirements when the amended term concludes.
