Point Borough Council to Talk Trash Bids at Dec. 6 Meeting

It looks like there is going to be a lot more trash talk at Point Borough's Dec. 6 Borough Council meeting.

The council is expected to least discuss private bids for trash and recycling collection contracts, and could even decide to vote to award those contracts at the Dec. 6 meeting.

If contracts are not voted on next week, they have to be voted on soon, since the current contracts for trash and recycling collection expire on Dec. 31.

It appears that two waste collection companies currently collecting the Borough's trash and recycling are bidding the lowest for new contracts.

However, the bids opened in are still being reviewed by Borough Administrator David Maffei, for a full financial analysis, and borough Attorney Scott Kenneally, who will check that the returned bids meet the requirements of the borough's advertised bid specifications.

Maffei said, just after bids were opened on Nov. 22, that this is the first time in the 21 years he has served in his current position that trash bids came in lower than a current contract.

When asked if that was a surprise, he said, "No, I'm not surprised they're lower. Maybe it's because of the economy, maybe it's because we were looking at possibly doing it in-house or through shared services with Brick."

Point Borough councilman Robert Sabosik, who was at Borough Hall as the bids were opened and read by Maffei, said afterwards, "They're all lower than what we have now and what Brick would have been.

"That's what I expected. I did research, trash bids were coming in lower all over the state. This is a great day for Point Pleasant. It's saving a lot of taxpayer money."

Sabosik said that because construction is down about 38 percent in the state, trash haulers have a lot less business because they're not hauling debris from construction and demolition sites.

Sabosik and Point Borough Councilman Mitch Remig, who was also at Borough Hall when the bids were opened, said the new bids are lower than what it would have cost to hire Brick to do the work because that would have required buying robo-cans and paying additionally for bulk pick-up throughout the borough and also for trash and recycling pick-up at local condominiums.

Bids just received from private haulers include the condominiums, said Remig, adding he received that information from Borough Public Works Director Robert Forsyth.

Sabosik said the Brick proposal would have cost almost $800,000 just for one year. He said the base offer was $624,627 for trash and recycling pick-up, plus another $68,413 for condominium pick-up.

"If we had bonded for robo-cans, it would have cost $100,000 to $170,000 per year to pay the bonding off," Sabosik said. "So their total, including bonding, would have been about $800,000."

Brick would not have been able to pick up the borough's trash unless the borough bought the robo-cans since Brick only uses trash trucks with automated arms that pick up the retrofitted robo-cans. The borough's two current contractors for trash and recycling collection use rear-compacting trucks.

Now borough officials are scrutinizing bids to determine which are the "lowest, responsible bids," as mandated by state law.

Municipalities are required to accept the lowest, responsible bid, with the word "responsible" included because towns have the right to reject the lowest bids if they do not fulfill all requirements.

There were various categories of bid specifications for trash collection, including one to continue the twice-weekly trash collection during the summer and one to change that to weekly, just like the rest of the year.

Suburban Disposal Inc. of Fairfield beat their own current contract price for trash collection by $212,000.

The new bid of $524,000 is $212,000 less than the $736,000 Suburban was paid this past year to collect trash using rear-compacting trucks, with twice weekly summer collection.

Regarding the assertions by Sabosik and Remig that the private bids are less than Brick's, Democratic Councilman Chris Leitner said, "As I have said from day one, and for every day thereafter, I look forward to analyzing this to get the best deal for the Borough. 

"If not for the competitive marketplace Mayor Schroeder, Mr. McHugh, Mr. Goss and I created, we would not such low prices to compare," Leitner said. "I am very proud we have saved Point Pleasant so much money."

"Note that some of the prices do include 'robocans' pickup so the best bid may still include the need for robocans - we should have taken that first step to truly analyze all options," Leitner said, referring to the Republican council members voting against taking the first step towards bonding should a robo can purchase be needed later.

"The proposal from Brick is just that, a proposal whose terms can and will change (if we go with them)," Leitner said. "The current proposal allows, I think for up to five years but allows either side to leave at the end of any year or with 90 days notice at any time. We can end after a year or go longer."

Regarding the Brick proposal, Leitner has said hiring Brick would save about $1.6 million in annual trash and recycling collection costs over a five-year period.

Mayor William Schroeder said Brick's price was about $500,000 less for one year, compared to what the borough paid this year. However, he said, that did not include bulk or condominium pick-up. With those figured in, Brick's offer was about $320,000 less than what was paid this year, he said.

A bid sheet from Brick to Point Borough (see attached PDF) states that Brick was going to charge $351,291 per year for trash collection and $273,336 for recycling collection, for a total of $624,627, not including collection at condominiums or collection of any bulk or metal.

That total is $506,373 less than the borough's current contracts which total $1,131,000, including $736,000 for this year's trash removal and $395,000 for this year's recycling collection done by Elizabeth-based Meadowbrook Industries, LLC.

When Democrats wanted to bond to possibly buy robo cans, in case Brick's bid was lower, Republicans said the borough shouldn't move any closer to doing business with Brick until they know how much private haulers will charge for the service.

The three Democratic council members, Chris Goss, Leitner and John McHugh Jr., voted yes, with the three Republican members, Antoinette DePaola, Sabosik and Remig, voting no, after a lengthy debate.

Usually, in the mayor-borough council form of government, the mayor votes only to break a tie. However, the mayor has no power on votes for bond ordinances because they require a "super majority" which means four affirmative council votes.

So Schroeder didn't vote because it wouldn't have made any difference. However, he and his Democratic colleagues made it clear they wanted the ordinance in place.

The ordinance would have authorized the borough to borrow $840,000 as the bulk of the anticipated cost of $883,000 to buy approximately 8,100 robo-cans for households in the borough.

Democrats argued that the ordinance did not actually authorize spending any money and, even if passed, would only be used if the borough decides later to either hire Brick or a private hauler who uses trucks compatible with robo-cans, but needs its host towns to provide the cans.