County hears proposal for large transfer-station fee hike as operator cites wage, regulatory and program costs

Columbia County commissioners heard an update March 11 on a near-final contract to operate the county transfer station that includes a proposed increase in the operator's annual fee to roughly $1,427,000 for 2026, a rise staff described as roughly 67% compared with the current annual payment of about $156,000.

Public Works Director Michael Russell summarized negotiations and the county's work to finalize the contract, saying the parties had reached agreement on most terms and that staff planned to place the contract on the consent agenda next week after completing final edits. Russell said the operator's 2026 financial proposal reflects built-up costs, indexing to CPI and several drivers that changed since the county's last full procurement.

A representative of the incumbent operator (Hudson Garbage Service) told commissioners the company's bid was built from the ground up to reflect current wages, staffing needs and equipment costs. The representative said the firm recorded a $370,000 loss on the operation in 2025 and that a roughly 10% target net margin under the new proposal reflects industry norms for the company's scope of work. "In 2025 we lost about $370,000," the company representative said.

Commissioners pressed for detail on specific cost drivers and market interest. One member noted the bid list showed only a single responsive proposal and asked whether other haulers had been willing to bid. Staff and the operator said some larger firms may not bid local transfer-station contracts because the staffing model and travel make them unattractive; staff proposed additional checks with neighboring providers and Metro to confirm pricing and market participation before finalizing the contract.

The proposal also includes a reuse program component the county would fund through the operator; staff and the vendor identified annual reuse-program costs near $96,000. Commissioners asked whether the reuse program and other scope elements could be removed or adjusted if the county later determined the program did not deliver expected value. The operator said removing the reuse program would be a substantive scope change and would trigger an equitable price adjustment under the contract.

Staff described the timeline as tight: the county holds a short extension of the incumbent agreement that carries into mid-March, and staff said they had targeted March 18 as a fallback if additional time was required. Commissioners asked staff to do follow-up checks on competition and to provide a more detailed cost breakdown and the final contract language by email prior to next week's meeting.

The board made no final decision on the contract at the March 11 meeting. Staff indicated they were negotiating remaining CPI indexing language and other edits; if staff proceed to place the item on consent, commissioners would have the opportunity to vote on the finalized contract at that subsequent meeting.

What's next: County staff will collect additional price comparisons, send commissioners a revised contract and supporting cost worksheets, and return the item for a consent vote, likely within two weeks.