2/13/2013 UPPER CAPE REGIONAL TRANSFER STATION BOARD OF MANAGERS Minutes

Home Browse Search

s be simple, it could be done. Mr. Tilton inquired whether the contractors would be interested in an RFP containing the prevailing wage requirement. Mr. Paultz responded that he would expect a variety of haulers would be interested in different aspects of the facility. Mr. Cavossa questioned the need for prevailing wage and his intent to research it further, adding that haulers located within 20 miles of the facility were most likely to respond. Mr. Cavossa referenced Falmouth-'s agreement with Bourne and its impact to small businesses. Mr. Cavossa noted the importance of the UCRTS serving as a viable option for commercial haulers since Bourne may not be a viable option. M�. D. Barrett stated that Bourne would first consider Sandwich and Mashpee, should any additional deals be offered for reserved tonnage. Mr, D. Barrett also noted that municipalities were beginning to move away from commercial involvement. Mr. D. Barrett noted that the State required prevailing wage for the operation of the facilities and offered to semi the information to IIT-. Cavossa, who noted that waste hauling was often exempt from some rules. Where was discussion regarding the expense of operators being paid prevailing wage. Ms. Laurent noted that, in Mashpee, prevailing wage was paid for work completed in Mashpee. Ms. Laurent offered to work on a draft RFP or conditions, but questioned the goal of the UCRTS to go out to bid, stating that Mashpee was interested in reducing the operational cost to the town and Mr. Tilton agreed. Mr. Tilton suggested that it could take a year to develop and resolve an 'P and questioned whether it would end up saving the toms much money, adding that the shortfall issue had been addressed by accepting waste from non-member toms. Mr. D. Barrett agreed. Mr. Tilton recommended looking into prevailing wage and suggested shelving the public/private RFP, but keeping it as an option for the future since there was insufficient time remaining on the existing contract. The Chair agreed, suggesting that time would be needed to review and amend all existing agreements, such as with the N4MR and DEP., Mr. D, Barrett suggested that there may be other uses for the facility, such as recycling, and suggested that SWAC could soon be investigating recycling options. I&. Cavossa questioned an RFP taking years and a delay that could potentially save $40,000 to $50,000. Mr. Cavossa also suggested that it was shortsighted to delay making a change, noting that the facility could be a revenue generator by the time the contract expired if changes were considered now. Ms. Laurent stated that more information was needed, adding that any IFP could not make guarantees beyond the end of 2014. Mr. Cavo ssa noted that 2 years would allow municipalities to see the benefits of a public/private agreement, while maintaining the rail and keeping trues off the road. There was agreement that the issue was complicated and would take time. Ills. Brazier inquired about the annual tonnage allowed by the UCRTS permit and.Ills. Laurent stated that the obligation to the rail was 40,000 tons, but that the permit was for a higher figure. Mr. Cavo ssa suggested possible other uses for the T.. CRT , such as composting. Ms. Laurent recommended identifying answers to the questions and discussing the issue further at the next meeting and Board members were in agreement. Mr. Tilton inquired about Falmouth's opinion on the issue and the Chair responded that he would forward Falmouth Town Counsel"s opinion, Mr. Tilton made a motion that the issue would be looked into further and discussed at the next meeting; Mr. D. Barrett seconded the motion. All voted unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Discussion of Future Agenda 3