The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0243.092I L ~staH I ~ :J'eIXli--------"! April 30, 1992 Honorable city Council 6 Palo Alto, California _,I ID:!ru!.!ementn __ to Report re Second: Kemora~_~_Q!!l ot ___ Jl_nderst4ndi~ Sunnyvale Materials and Recove_~y_ Transfer Slation Members of the Council: This report supplements CHR: 237 ~ 92 which is in your packet for action MondaYI May 4, 1992. Because the action you are requested to take via that report is so si9nificant~ I felt it importa~t to provide you with some addit.ional perspective. We have been 'Working on the issue of p!"oviding long-term solid wa.ste disposal space for Palo Alto for the last 15 years. .As you Know, we recently ca~e to you with a recom~endation to join with Mountain View and sunnyvale in a long-term agreement to secure landfill space at Kirby Canyor. in San Jose. COUncil approved that arrangement. That agreement. ~hich is currently in place, assures it future. generation of Palo-Altans of solid 'Waste disposal c-apacity for 30 years. In my vie~, it is as significant as the long-term elec~ric power contracts negotiated in the 1960's. Having the disposal capacity is only part of the solution to our solid waste problem. We must provide some means by whiCh to transport the waste to the landfill. The most reasonable solution to that part of the problem is to construct a transfer station and haul the waste to the landfill in large trucks. We have been ~orKing tor several years on this issue and have devoted thousands of staff hours to the subject. Recently, the three cities issued a Fequest for Proposals (RFP) to see what the private sector had to cffer in the ~ay of providing this facility. In addition, we began costing out the possibility of building the transfer station ourselveG~ After months of negotiating with the private sector applicants, it has become clear that cuilding the station ourse.lvE:s is not only financially feasible, it is m.ore economic ov£r the life of the project. In orde.r to keep these conplicat.e.d arrangements coordinated, the three cities long ago agreed to put the city of Sunnyvale in the "lead". The transfer station is to be located in their cit~{ (they are furthest south), on their land. Under the existing agreem~nts we have already authorized Sunnyvale to a~ard a contract LO a private com.pany without consultation 'With Palo Alto or Mountain View. CJoiR:24J:92 L f .. ~ .. , "::.:.-;",, " . - r Page Two If the three cities choose "'co build the facility themselves - instead of going to the private sector --it will be Su.nnyvale ""'ho 'Will again take the :II lead" . They ... il1 let the contracts and supervise the construction of the t.r-ansfer station. The fundamental purpose of the second Memorandum of ender-standing (MOU), which is the subject of CMR!237;92 and ~hich I a~ recol'l11ll~nding that ycu approve, is 1) to assure sunnyvale that Mountain View and Palo Alto will participate if 5un~yvale decides to build the project itself and 2) to set forth the general conditions under which the facility .,ill be built. Tnere is always an €l~ment of risk in large projects like this. Having a contract with a private firm to build the transfer station is one ~ay to try to limit the risk. A contract allo~s each party to set down in writing the responsibilities that ~ill accrue under certain circumstances. Because the notion of constructing this station ourselves comes fairly late in the process, ~e have not been able to work through all the details involved in a three city project. The MDU we are recommending dl;!als with most of the issues; but it is not comprehensive nor does it give us all the legal protection .c might li1<e~ in case things do not go according to schedule, or if cost overruns become serious. On the positive side~ the three cities have an excellent working relationship based on trust and commitment to equity for each partner. I am convinced that ~e can move ahead with the KOU, despite some shortcomings it has, and deal with the problems as they arise. One final, and per-haps most importa,nt, note. Approval of the MOU by the C~uncil gives the City Manager the authority to commit the City of Palo Alto to join with Sunnyvale and Mountain Viev to build the facility if, after reviewing all the relevant information, he believes it to be in t.he best interest of Palo .a.lto. As I noted above, the three sta:ffs have spent thousands of hours on this project. I have personally participated extensively ii'l these discussicns.. I have re'.li ewed staff analyses, IIlemos, internal reports and details. unless ther~ is some startling new information regarding the private sector responses to the RFP, I intend to commit us to joining ~ith Mountain View and Sunnyvale to build this facility ourselves. I realize that this procedure is extraordinary. Ho~ever, I s~e no other ~ay to me~t the existing contractual time constraints and keep this critical project from foundering. Respectfully··--·submi tted, h --/ lU/ WILtI~~~ztS~ER--------- City:Manager J CMR:243:92 L ~71·.~' ... . -~ . :