Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket 07-06-2009 Workshopct CA" ZA"VOUL City of Cape Canaveral CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida MONDAY JULY 6, 2009 5:30 PM AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: DISCUSSION: Evaluation and Ranking of the Proposals for RFP 01-2009 Garbage and Recycle Collection Services. ADJOURNMENT: Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, the City hereby advises the public that: If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose that person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission into evidence of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office (868-1221) 48 hours in advance of the meeting. 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 Fax: (321) 868-1248 www.ciryofcapecanaveral.org • email: cr-apecanaveraJ@cfl.rr.com City Council Meeting Date: July 6, 2009 Subject: EVALUATION AND RANKING OF THE PROPOSALS FOR RFP 01-2009 GARBAGE AND RECYCLE COLLECTION SERVICES Department: City Manager ...........-....- .......... Summary:.... . On May 26, 2009, the City issued RFP 01-2009 Garbage and Recycle Collection Services, the Bid Opening was held on June 26, 2009 with four (4) companies submitting responsive bids. The City's consultant, RCG, Inc. Consulting, reviewed each bid in detail and has prepared the attached report with a recommendation to assist City Council with the Evaluation and Ranking of these firms. Requested Council Action: City Council evaluate and rank the responsive bids, select firms for oral presentations and final ranking at the next workshop meeting to be held the week of July 15tH Financial Impact: _._.�_............. _...... To be determined Attachments: N Supporting Documents Reviewed Consultant's Report Evaluation Criteria and Evaluation Matrix Submitting Department Head: Date: Approved by City Manager:. Data: 07-02-09 City Council Action: [ ]I Approve aVRecommended [ ] Disapproved [ ] Approved with Modifications [ ] Tabled to Time Certain 7017 S, Ad,aw ia; ,l voiiie New Sistyrna Beach, 1•"la ida :M69 PlYa;9 86-427-9339 Fax :386.42 7..4 49 Cell 86-52 7-�,(P`i'7 F-, navel MLHK(l (a v,AO➢, t ONI RCG- , hie. Consulting July 2, 2009 Mr. )Bennett Boucher City Manager 105 Polk Avenue Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 Subject: Analysis and recommendations for RFP # 0 1 -2009 Solid Waste Collection Contract Dear Mr. Boucher: Pursuant to our contract with the City to provide professional consulting services during the solid waste collection RFP procedure, our firm has reviewed the eight (8) submissions of the RFP # 0 1 -2009 for residential and commercial solid waste collection services as per the summary below: Of the eight (8) firms submitting, four (4) submitted full qualified proposal packages, four (4) submitted a letter of no response. Additionally three (3) contractors who attended the pre -proposal confercmt did not submit either a proposal package or a letter of no bid. We have fully analyzed all components of each submission and offer the following: Advanced Disposal- Submitted a letter of No Response, Choice Waste Services: Submitted a letter of No Response. Disposal: Submitted a letter of No Response. Emerald Waste Services: Submitted a letter of No Response. Reference checks are rated as follows in the questioning: Type of service rendered, types of complaints, level of complaints high, medium, low. Resolution of complaints: very satisfactory, satisfactory and unsatisfied. Rating of the overall service: Very satisfied, satisfied and unsatisfied. Republic Services: • Complied with all of the specifications of the RFP requirements. • This firm submitted the highest pricing for residential and commercial collection for all pricing quotes except for Alternate 01. • This firm's operational plan, list of equipment, manpower, and recycling marketing plan is not outlined in detail. The transition plan and recycling marketing pian are not specific. They do not name the equipment by make and model and only state the make and model to be late model as per the RFP specifications. • This firm's submitted equipment list appears to be a total list of equipment used within the Central Florida operations and isnot specific as to the equipment to be used to provide the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U'ei te Consulting tit4� and County Alanogement Aly 2, 2009 Page 2 services to the City of Cape Canaveral. Spare/backup equipment ratio of l spare to 7 front line vehicles is adequate. The equipment is not listed specifically for servicing the conimercial front load accounts. • Although the firm states they will purchase and provide the required types of vehicles, the equipment list outlining the number of collection vehicles and support vehicles by type is not stated. • The proposer needs to verify the equipment list by type and quantity for each. They did list the number of drivers and helpers they would anticipate to provide the services to the City. • The recycling marketing plan is not specific. • The plan for handling customer service complaints as stated has numerous customer service representatives (CSR) which logs complaint calls into a log type system and requires call in's from customers who can choose to leave a message. There is no mention of an internet access to a web base tracking system for entering complaints or requests which would be accessible by residents and commercial businesses. • Republic submitted a Facility Emergency Response Plan which is generic but with events detailed as to their part within certain actions. • The key personnel within management and operations are highly qualified within the waste collection field with numerous years of service. • The transition plan is detailed and specific as to dates by category. • Financials are current and detailed, • Green Solution statements are minimal at best and there are no direct statements relating to or directed to the City of Cape Canaveral, • References checked with other municipalities. • References: The quality and level of service provided is satisfactory for the City of Oviedo, Joe Grusaukas, Polk County Public Works, Hillsborough Solid Waste Department, Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority. Waste Management Inc. of Florida: • Complied with all of the specifications of the RFP requirements. • This firm submitted the next to lowest pricing for residential collection for all options, • This firm's operational plan, list of equipment, manpower, transitional plan and recycling marketing plan is outlined in detail with some statements regarding the inspection of commercial containers being inspected every collection day. I question this statement. • This firm's list of equipment states 2 automated side loaders which at die start of this contract will be four (4) years old for residential garbage collection, two (2) recycling trucks, one will be five (5) years old and the otber two (2) years old, one (l) clam shell truck eight (8) years old, one (1) commercial front end load truck four (4) years old and one (]),roll off truck four (4) years old. One (1) each type of truck for use as a backup although there is no reference to the make, model or age of the backup vehicles. The amount of equipment offered within the submittal will be adequate. • The staffing as listed by this company is somewhat confusing since they state the residential waste will be collected by the use of an automated side loader which has a one man crew, the driver only. The company states they will have three (3) residential rear load drivers plus a spare driver and will only have two (2) automated side loader collection vehicles. • Green Solutions stated within the submission are generic with the national company's brochure and are not specific with any direct statements relating or directed to the City of Cape Canaveral. • Letters of recommendations; only one (l) from a municipality, one (1) frons a local resident and live ( 5) from organizations which Mr. Geletko lists in his resume which he is either a present or past member of such organization. July 2, 2009 Page 3 References: One municipal official was very displeased with the response by Waste Management in dealing with issues in a timely manor, Stated he had to call the corporate office in Houston to get results. Other listed references were satisfied or very satisfied with the level of service and response to complaints. Brevard County Solid Waste Department, Mr. Scott, Palm Bay, Lee Feldman, Melbourne, Jennifer Wilster, Indian Harbor Beach, Cocoa Beach, Ilene Clark. Waste Pro of Florida, Inc.. • Complied with all of the specifications of the RFP requirements. • This firm submitted the lowest pricing for residential and commercial services for all options. • This firm's operational plan, list of equipment, manpower, transitional plan and recycling marketing plan is very detailed. The Customer service and conununity service plan is in depth as well as their planned green movement environmental program for the firm, its equipment, employees and municipal contracts. • This firm offers an adequate amount of equipment, which will be state of the art and brand new collection vehicles and containers to service both the residential and commercial units. The equipment listed is two (2) 2009 rear load trucks with cart flippers, two (2) 2009 Recycling Trucks, one (1) 2009 Claw truck, one (1) 2009 Commercial front load truck, one (1) 2009 roll off truck, one (1) 2009 Commercial container service truck and one (1) 2009 Supervisor pickup truck. These vehicles will meet the 2008 Federal emission standards, and many other accessories which will comply with Green Solutions. Spare equipment will be one for each type of service and no older than five (5) years old. Therefore, Waste Pro will have sufficient spare backup equipment. Waste Pro also states all new commercial containers to be put in place within the City. • The proposal plan for servicing the beachside containers and bus stop locations is detailed as to the type of truck, manpower, frequency and inspections. • The customer service plan for this firm is hands on locally, with a bonus program for all employees from dispatchers to drivers and supervisors. • This company has a detailed recycling education plan along with contributing up to $2,000,00 per year within the City to promote recycling. • This company has complied with the requirements of the RFP specifications with a full understanding ofHB7135. They are the only company that has complied within their submittal of this requirement_ • Green Solutions, such as offering 18 gallon recycle bins for the same cost as 14 gallon bins to enhance residential recycling if the City decides to continue using these types of bins, as well as giving the residents a choice of either carts or bins for recycling. The proposal also speaks to the use of hybrid trucks for certain services, installed on board oil purification systems on the entire fleet. The submission booklet has an entire section devoted to Green solutions. • Waste Pro is offering electronic recycling to the residents, to partner with Recycle Bank, distribute reusable grocery shopping bags to Al residents whether it is single family or multi- family and would include rules and regulations of the City along with recycling information. • Waste Pro is in the process of discussions with a firm to recycle yard waste. This will work to comply with HB 7135 which is 75% recycling of yard waste. • The submission speaks in detail regarding their Disaster Recovery Plan, their internal equipment and manpower available as well as a standing agreement with a substantial disaster recovery company who will be in addition to the primary company. • This is the only company who has complied with the RFP specification of having a live online web base tracking system which will be available through the internet for residents and commercial customers. • This submittal is one of the most complete and comprehensive submittals we have reviewed recently. JuIv 2, 2009 Page 4 References: All references including startup contracts have checked out in excellent rating and as very satisfactory. The last two (2) transitions from previous contractors to Waste Pro were reported by the Municipalities (City of Daytona Beach Shores and the City of Winter Park) as seamless. All other references reported as very satisfactory: City of Daytona Beach, David Hand, New Smyrna Beach, Khalid Resheidat, Sanford, Brooke Benner, Seminole County, Johnny Edwards, Winter Springs, Kip Loekcuff. Veolia Environmental Services of Florida, Inc.: • Complied with all of the specifications of the RFP requirements. • This firm submitted the highest pricing for residential collection for all pricing quotes under Alternate gl and no pricing for the other pricing options. • This company would require a change in service days. This £inn's operational plan and recycling marketing plan is not outlined in detail. The transition plan and recycling marketing plan are not specific. They do name the equipment by make and model and list by name and job description those employees presently in various roles and capacity in the organization within the Central Florida operation. • Spare/backup equipment ratio is not listed. • There is no listing for the number of drivers and helpers they would anticipate to provide the services to the City. • The recycling marketing plan is not specific • The plan for handling customer service complaints as stated has numerous customer service representatives (CSR) which log call in complaints into a log type system and requires call in's from customers who can choose to leave a message. There is no mention for an internet access to a web base tracking system for entering complaints or requests. • Veolia submitted a Backup Transport System which has a brief statement regarding Disaster Response which is basic and generic without detail. • The key personnel within management and operations are highly qualified within the waste collection field with numerous years of service. • There is no mention regarding the transition plan. • Financials are current and detailed, • Green Solution statements are minimal at best and there are no direct statements relating to or directed to the City of Cape Canaveral. • References were checked with other municipalities of which five (5) are listed. • References: The quality and level of service provided is satisfactory. Orange County Solid Waste Department, Lake County did not receive a call back at this time, Lee County, Lindsey Sampson, Port Orange, Warren Pike, Palm Beach County, John Archambo. The pricing seems to have a substantial variance among the proposer's with regards to the residential and commercial pricing. In post proposal interviews with the two proposer's who bid very high on all components. We wanted to have a clear and certain understanding why such a large disparity in the pricing. Both Republic and Veolia stated their EBINTDA requirements for a new start up company was high without a base in place to absorb the cost of capital. This requirement snakes it difficult to bring the pricing more in line to a competitive range. Waste Management and Waste Pro both have existing operations within the area; therefore. their pricing is a competitive and market rate range. Based on our review and analysis of the submittals, the following will outline for the City Manager, Mayor and City Council a synopsis of the material and pricing submitted. In all four (4) RFP scenarios Waste Pro submined the overall lowest and most responsive proposal. Aly 2, 2009 Page 5 Waste Management's submission is ranked as next highest pricing proposal and the response was less detailed in many aspects of the RFP requirements. Waste Pro's total cost submitted ranges from 16.79% to 19.52% lower than the next lowest submission which is Waste Management. Waste Pro's submitted annual dollar amount is lower than Waste Management which ranges from $179,100.04 to $208,869.64. Under Alternate #t3, Waste Pro is $180,801.16 annually lower than Waste Management and 558,784.28 or 6.7% lower than the City's current cost. Under Alternate 43, Waste Management's pricing, which is their lowest pricing alternative, is $122,016.88 or 14% higher than the City's current cost. Based on all of the factors reviewed within the submissions by the four proposer's overall responses, quality of service offered, and lowest total contract price, our recommendation is to seek approval from the Mayor and City Council to negotiate a final contract with Waste Pro of Florida, Inc. If there are any questions please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, William S. Redman, Jr. Senior Vice President cc: Jean S. Redman, President 1-jvj r' g, 9 8 8,' F, F, Z4 5 2 2 9 00, irtnyy b* In, 40 10 W WS 4 clyy M)l V4 low Z�O olw; Z; s:ojo 8,8 s (N 0 C, . 0 Q INT 0 O,W 8 8 g, low &A mv ry 8 's 1-jvj alp ml r' g, 9 8 8,' F, F, Z4 5 2 2 9 00, irtnyy b* In, 40 10 W WS 4 clyy M)l V4 low Z�O olw; Z; 0 8 8 g, m mv 8 's Z�, alp ml r' g, 9 8 8,' F, F, Z4 5 2 2 9 00, irtnyy b* In, 40 10 W clyy M)l V4 low Z�O olw; Z; 0 8 8 g, m mv S'V FIs rn . . . . 0 V9 .2 c"O 2 2 9 00, irtnyy b* In, 40 10 W clyy M)l V4 low Z�O olw; Z; 0 8 8 g, %l 8 's Z�, S'V FIs rn . . . . 0 V9 .2 c"O 2 2 9 00, irtnyy b* In, 40 10 W fd WAN 01 low Z�O olw; Z; za t It 8 k z ",q fn k 44 ss c a3 as 9 R LL 8SSF88Y ag 8 8 8 9 8 8 �i 8 18 2 8 8 4� F F wil qqd W Ol U) C V C a c' m ! v w N' J x X X I,. x z z lZ zoQ -3:- 0a 0 Q w R c � o, .........E n xi IX x l x Zi Gy h I3w '9 w w...., L. CLI' a z —_ z z ' i A a I�► c� 2 w o W' 2> o m ec i I � tMo ;o o z_„ a z_..z a Jz 0 0. z z X, x x c x z �L EVALUATION CRITERIA The following criteria will be used to determine the most responsible, responsive bidder. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as a result of this Request for Proposals, if it is in the best interests of the City to do so. The Franchise Agreement, if awarded, will be awarded to the Bidder the City determines can best meet the City's needs. Lowest price will not necessarily guarantee award. Bid Prices: Unit prices as contained on the Bid Form submitted by the bidder will be used to determine the total costs to the City and its customers for residential solid waste and recyclable material collection and disposal services. Presentation: The short listed Contractor shall have an opportunity to make a presentation to the selection committee regarding their qualifications and experience, their transition plan, the relative benefits of the alternative collection methodologies, their public education programs, plans to expand recycling services and materials, etc. Competency, Reputation, and Regional Experience of Vendor: The Contractor shall have a minimum of 3 successful years experience with a contract for collection, transport and recycling of solid waste equal or greater than 5,000 residential units within 100 miles of City. The City may contact any agency for which the vendor is or has performed services to determine the competency, reputation and experience of the vendor. In addition, the City may consider its own experience in dealing with the vendor. Financial Ability of Vendor: Each Bidder is required to submit a copy of its most recent audited financial statement prepared by a State licensed Certified Public Accountant. The City may also review information received from any source concerning the financial ability of the vendor to provide the required services to the City. Prospective bidders are prohibited from contacting any member of the Selection Committee (except the Facilitator) at any time during the bid process, up to the time of contract award. Any attempted contact may be grounds for disqualification. Evaluation Matri .,..._. Eva Dints Fee Proposal 40 cation Criteria Maximum P 2 Contract Approach 10 3 Customer Service 20 4 Experience/Qualifications 30 Total Points To Be Earned 100 Total Points to be earned are on a scale of 1 — 100 points, 1 = lowest, 100 = highest Tentative Calends....... r.of --_ Events` 1 RFP Issue Date May 26, 2009 2 Mandato Pre -Proposal Conference — City Manager er June 2, 2009 10 a.m. 3 Bid Responses Due to City Clerk June 26, 2009 by 3:00 p.m. 4 Bid Opening June 26, 2009 4:00 p.m. 5 Selection Meeting Evaluation and Rankin — City Council July 6, 2009 6 Oral Presentations and Final Rankin — City Council July 13, 2009 7 Contract award — City Council July 21, 2009 8 Effective Contract Date October 1, 2009 All times, dates and actions are subject to change. All meetings are publicly posted and open to the public under the Sunshine Law. EVALUATION CRITERIA The following criteria will be used to determine the most responsible, responsive bidder, The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as a result of this Request for Proposals, if it is in the best interests of the City to do so. The Franchise Agreement, if awarded, will be awarded to the Bidder the City determines can best meet the City's needs. Lowest price will not necessarily guarantee award. Bid Prices: Unit prices as contained on the Bid Form submitted by the bidder will be used to determine the total costs to the City and its customers for residential solid waste and recyclable material collection and disposal services. Presentation: The short listed Contractor shall have an opportunity to make a presentation to the selection committee regarding their qualifications and experience, their transition plan, the relative benefits of the alternative collection methodologies, their public education programs, plans to expand recycling services and materials, etc. Competency, Reputation, and Regional Experience of Vendor: The Contractor shall have a minimum of 3 successful years experience with a contract for collection, transport and recycling of solid waste equal or greater than 5,000 residential units within 100 miles of City. The City may contact any agency for which the vendor is or has performed services to determine the competency, reputation and experience of the vendor. In addition, the City may consider its own experience in dealing with the vendor. Financial Ability of Vendor: Each Bidder is required to submit a copy of its most recent audited financial statement prepared by a State licensed Certified Public Accountant. The City may also review information received from any source concerning the financial ability of the vendor to provide the required services to the City. Prospective bidders are prohibited from contacting any member of the Selection Committee (except the Facilitator) at any time during the bid process, up to the time of contract award. Any attempted contact may be grounds for disqualification. Evaluation Matrix Evaluation Criteria Maximum Points 1 Fee Proposal 40 2 Contract Approach 10 3 Customer Service 20 4 Experience/Qualifications 30 Total Points To Be Earned 100 Total Points to be earned are on a scale of 1 — 100 points, 1 = lowest, 100 = highest Tentative Calendar of Events' 1 RFP Issue Date May 26, 2009 2 3 Mandato Pre -Proposal Conference — City Manager Bid Responses Due to CRy Clerk June 2, 2009 10 a.m. June 26, 2009 by 3:00 p.m 4 5 Bid Opening Evaluation and Rankin — Cit CounciY Selection Meetingg y June 26, 2009 4:00 m. July 6, 2009 6 Oral Presentations and Final Rankin — Cit Council July 13, 2009 7 Contract award — City Council Jul 21, 2009 8 Effective Contract Date 1, 2009 * All times, dates and actions are subject to change. All meetings are publicly posted and open to the public under the Sunshine Law.