Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lower Pottsgrove delays municipal trash contract decision after bidders cite industry-wide price increases
Summary
Two bidders — JP Mascaro and Whitetail Disposal — presented competing five-year municipal trash proposals on Sept. 2. Commissioners agreed to take more time to review the bids and aim to decide at the Sept. 18 meeting before the Oct. 6 legal deadline.
Lower Pottsgrove Township’s Board of Commissioners heard formal presentations on Aug. 6 municipal trash bids on Sept. 2 and agreed to delay awarding the contract to allow more time for review.
Solicitor Jamie Ottaviano told the Board it received two sealed bids: one from JP Mascaro and Sons and one from Whitetail Disposal. Under the public-bid schedule the Board has until Oct. 6 to decide whether to award a five-year contract.
Al DeGennaro, deputy general counsel for JP Mascaro, told commissioners “the price has gone up significantly in this industry,” and outlined cost pressures the company has absorbed. Sam Augustine, JP Mascaro’s director of sales and marketing, highlighted the company’s local history and said Mascaro stood by its earlier performance during the COVID years.
Alessandro Giacobbe, representing Whitetail Disposal, said his company also has seen industry price increases but told the Board the two proposals differ substantially. “The difference between the two is about $700,000 over the five years,” he said, and described Whitetail’s customer-service procedures and reporting capabilities.
Commissioner Robert Mohollen proposed that the Board take additional time to compare the bids and vote at the next public meeting on Sept. 18; commissioners agreed. Commissioner William Keohane, who has praised JP Mascaro’s responsiveness in past contracts, asked whether the winning bidder would provide a letter explaining first-year price increases that the Township could distribute to residents. Both bidders said they would provide such a letter if requested.
No formal award or vote on the contract was taken on Sept. 2. Under the legal notice the Board must act by Oct. 6, 2025, and the commissioners said they plan to review the written proposals and any supporting documentation before making a selection.
What’s next: The Board is scheduled to revisit the bids at its Sept. 18 meeting; if the Board awards a contract it will announce the chosen provider, first-year rates, and whether it will authorize any transitional or one-time costs to be passed to residents.
