Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners debate county-run hauling vs. Evergreen contract; decision postponed for more information
Summary
After reviewing bids and county-cost estimates for hauling and refuse services, commissioners debated a five-year Evergreen contract versus leasing compactor trucks and running service in-house. Concerns about backup equipment, remote-site coverage, severability and termination clauses led the board to postpone a final vote and request additional procurement details.
Lincoln County commissioners on May 13 extensively discussed procurement options for the county's hauling/refuse contract before postponing a final award to gather more information on service coverage, contract termination language and alternative county-run scenarios.
County staff presented bid comparisons showing the Evergreen contract as roughly $260,000 less over five years than a county-run service that would require about $128,000 in startup costs to buy service boxes and approximately $216,000 per year in leased compactor trucks. Staff warned that operating the service in-house would leave the county with fewer backup vehicles and risk site closures if a leased compactor failed; proponents of a county-run model said leasing newer trucks and shifting some remote sites to rolloff trailers could reduce long-term costs and increase local control.
Commissioners pressed staff about: severability and termination language in Evergreen's proposal; whether the county could negotiate progressive reductions in covered sites over time; options to convert remote sites to rolloff trailers serviced by lower-cost, non-CDL vehicles; the timeline to stand up county service before the current contract expires in November; and whether other vendors responded to procurement solicitations.
Public commenters suggested negotiating contract-step reductions, using smaller rolloff trailers that can be hauled by one-ton trucks for remote sites, and exploring small-business bidders for selected locations. One commenter suggested a phased two-year plan to transition to county-run service if feasible.
Outcome: The board postponed the award and directed staff to return with severability and termination clauses, clearer cost comparisons (including lease terms and equipment backup scenarios), and options for converting select remote sites to rolloffs. The matter will return to the agenda next week for further consideration.
Why it matters: Refuse-hauling contracts affect county budgets, service frequency in remote areas and longer-term options for local control. Commissioners weighed short-term cost savings from vendor contracting against reliability and operational control if the county assumed service directly.
Next steps: Staff will obtain the requested contract language and refined procurement comparisons for the board before the next meeting; commissioners signaled interest in exploring a phased county-run plan if the numbers and logistics support it.
