CC PACKET 07082014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Analysis 61 o To properly and adequately assess issues of value and price, the City engaged a reputable consultant, Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC, ("Foth") to compare the Proposal's prices with the current prices paid by City residents, as well to compare the value of services with other cities in the Twin Cities Metro Area that have moved from an open hauling system to a contract system. Attached to this Memorandum is a July 1, 2014 memorandum submitted by Foth providing these comparisons ("Foth Memo"). City Staff reiterates that "value" reflects merely one of the Priorities that the Council should consider. The increased amount of analysis devoted to this issue, in comparison to other Priorities, is a result of the inherent difficulty in performing truly accurate price comparisons in general and the City's lack of easy access to information regarding other cities' prices. City Staff encourages the Council to review and consider the Foth Memo, with the understanding that "city to city comparisons are an imperfect art" (Foth Memo, p. 7). With all of this in mind, City Staff reinforces the following points: City Staff does believe that many residents' bills will see a decrease from current rates, although it is difficult to determine exactly how much of a decrease because of the variance in customer rates in the current open hauling system and the unclear base price standards from which to determine any savings (Foth Memo, pp. 5-7). The Haulers have used as a standard their purported "current market price" (Foth Memo, p. 6). The Haulers represented to City Staff that this is derived from an average price currently charged to customers, among all three haulers, factoring in market share. The actual source of, or support for, this data was not provided to City Staff. The "current market price" conflicts with the rates represented to the City in the Haulers' respective Garbage Hauler/Recycling license application forms (Foth Memo, pp. 1-3, 5-7). City Staff believes it is justified, however, to use as a standard of comparison these reported numbers because they reflect total rates charged (e.g., prices added to collector -imposed surcharges) as required by City Code § 111.216(D), and no further indication of a rate change has been submitted to the City. City Code § 111.216(D): When the application is submitted, the applicant must file with the City Manager a schedule of proposed rates to be charged during the licensed period. Every licensee must provide 14 -days' prior written notification to the city and the licensee's customers of any change in rates to be implemented during the licensed period. 5