Is it Just Me - Trail Ridge Landfill Contract...

[jbm32206]

wow. this issue is really kind of heating up.

Does anyone know what the hell is the basic storyline?

And what is the Paul Harden connection?

The basic story line....let's see, we have Paul Harden who's the attorney for Waste Management, the one who is threatening to sue the city if the contract goes up for bid....even though the current contract doesn't expire for 7 more years? As well as Peyton is doing his best to ram this down our throats, at the cost of 750 million and 35 years. Good Ole' Susie Wiles who was supporting Republic in wanting this to be open for bid, until Peyton asked her not to help them, so she stepped aside. Or the fact that this is coming up for vote before the city council.

Does this help answer your questions?

[BridgeTroll]

Front page of the Times Union...
http://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-02-22/story/inside_the_fight_for_your

Trail Ridge Landfill: Inside the fight for your $750 million
By Tia Mitchell Story updated at 3:45 AM on Sunday, Feb. 22, 2009

In the coming weeks, the Jacksonville City Council will get a chance to weigh in on Mayor John Peyton’s proposal to award Waste Management a $750 million contract extension to operate the Trail Ridge landfill. Here is how you can weigh in:

Mayor John Peyton
Phone: (904) 630-1776
E-mail: JPeyton@coj.net


Council President Ronnie Fussell
Phone: (904) 630-1393
E-mail: RonnieF@coj.net

Jacksonville Mayor John Peyton said his plan to award Waste Management a $750 million contract extension to continue operating the city's landfill is unpopular because it's misunderstood.

"The unfortunate part about this is it's been framed poorly from the beginning," Peyton said, "and it was framed by the people that want to kill the deal."

Much of that opposition has come from Republic Services, a Waste Management competitor that believes the contract should be bid and the public needs to hear both sides of the issue.

"We want the citizens of Jacksonville to know that there is lots of money to be saved by bidding this out," said Paul McCormick, a Republic spokesman.

Though Peyton and his staff have tried hard to sell their plan to City Council members, the notion of not bidding such a large contract is still unpopular.

"On the surface, a no-bid environment is not where people want to go," he said. "It is counter-intuitive, granted, but this situation is different."

Peyton said he isn't sure how successful his efforts have been. The council hasn't discussed the issue as a group, and a vote is likely weeks away.

Council President Ronnie Fussell said members have a lot of questions about the plan and legal issues. Despite the many hours he has spent looking over documents, he said he isn't convinced.

Eventually, Peyton said, the council will be.

"My experience has been the more they study it, the deeper they drill down, the better this deal looks," he said.

Among the legal hurdles: Early on, Waste Management lobbyist Paul Harden said the company would sue "until the cows come home" if the deal was rejected.

"Paul Harden's comments have not been helpful," Peyton said.

Harden and other local political heavyweights have met frequently with members of the mayor's staff for Trail Ridge strategy sessions.

Councilman John Crescimbeni said the meetings send a bad message.

"If I was going to push a no-bid contract," he said, "I would try to distance myself from the actual vendor."


Timeline

1986

July: City efforts to buy an 800-acre landfill site from a private company are thwarted in court. But the city and the landowner begin negotiations on a separate parcel of land near the St. Johns County line.

November: St. Johns County asks the state to block Duval County's efforts to build a landfill near the county line.

December: The Sunbeam Road landfill, a 241-acre site owned and operated by Waste Management, is closed after years of residents' complaints.

1988

Dec. 1: The East landfill on Girvin Road is closed as a result of neighbors' complaints and threats of lawsuits, though it has several months of capacity remaining. The North landfill on New Berlin Road, with only a few months of capacity remaining, becomes the city's sole landfill. Within the week there are rumors that East landfill will reopen.

1989

Jan. 5: Mayor Tommy Hazouri reopens East landfill, his hand forced by legal challenges and community pressures.

January: Mid-American Waste Systems asks for the city's permission to build and operate a landfill on U.S. 301 south of Baldwin.

March: A competitor emerges. Waste Management of North America announces it also is looking to buy land on the Westside.

June: The City Council votes against Mid-American. Instead, Hazouri decides the city should own a new landfill and allow private companies to operate it. That contract would be worth an estimated $1 billion over 20 years.

October: Waste Management identifies land near the Baker County line for its proposed landfill, called Trail Ridge.

1990

January: St. Johns County begins lobbying Gov. Bob Martinez and the Cabinet to block permits Jacksonville needs to build the Southeast landfill. State regulators agree to allow the North landfill to be built higher than permitted, adding one year of capacity. In addition to Waste Management and Mid-American, the city receives proposals from two other companies vying to operate a new Westside landfill.

Aug. 27: After Waste Management's proposal is ranked No. 1, Hazouri selects the company as the winner.

1991

Feb. 12: Gov. Lawton Chiles and his Cabinet reject a stormwater permit application for the Southeast landfill. The City Council abandons the project to focus on Trail Ridge.

June 11: The City Council approves the contract with Waste Management.

Aug. 13: The council agrees to pay Baker County $1.3 million to halt its opposition.

1992

Jan. 27: Ground is broken on Trail Ridge.

March 1: East landfill on Girvin Road is closed.

May 18: First load of trash is dumped at Trail Ridge. North landfill is closed the next day.

2003

Mayor John Delaney's attempts to renegotiate Waste Management's contract fall through.

2007

Mayor John Peyton's administration begins negotiations with Waste Management to extend its Trail Ridge contract.

2008

June 24: Peyton asks the City Council for a contract extension for $750 million.

Sept. 15: City Council committees debate the contract renewal for the first time. Several council members balk at the price tag, lack of information from the administration and threats of a Waste Management lawsuit.

2009

Jan. 29: Peyton sends an e-mail to constituents in hopes of drumming up support for the contract.

Feb. 16: Republic Services submits a letter to the City Council saying it will agree to everything Waste Management has and save the city millions if it is allowed to bid on the contract.

Early March: The City Council is expected to meet for the first time together to discuss the proposed contract.

Source: Times-Union archives

[jbm32206]

There are companies that want to bid on this, and there's absolutely no reason why it shouldn't go up for bid. Peyton is wrong in trying to ram this down our throats, and city council needs to gain the back bone to stand up for what is the right thing to do.

Jacksonville Mayor John Peyton said his plan to award Waste Management a $750 million contract extension to continue operating the city's landfill is unpopular because it's misunderstood. "The unfortunate part about this is it's been framed poorly from the beginning," Peyton said, "and it was framed by the people that want to kill the deal."

Much of that opposition has come from Republic Services, a Waste Management competitor that believes the contract should be bid and the public needs to hear both sides of the issue. "We want the citizens of Jacksonville to know that there is lots of money to be saved by bidding this out," said Paul McCormick, a Republic spokesman.

Though Peyton and his staff have tried hard to sell their plan to City Council members, the notion of not bidding such a large contract is still unpopular. "On the surface, a no-bid environment is not where people want to go," he said. "It is counter-intuitive, granted, but this situation is different." Peyton said he isn't sure how successful his efforts have been.

The council hasn't discussed the issue as a group, and a vote is likely weeks away. Council President Ronnie Fussell said members have a lot of questions about the plan and legal issues. Despite the many hours he has spent looking over documents, he said he isn't convinced. Eventually, Peyton said, the council will be. "My experience has been the more they study it, the deeper they drill down, the better this deal looks," he said.

Among the legal hurdles: Early on, Waste Management lobbyist Paul Harden said the company would sue "until the cows come home" if the deal was rejected. "Paul Harden's comments have not been helpful," Peyton said. Harden and other local political heavyweights have met frequently with members of the mayor's staff for Trail Ridge strategy sessions.

Councilman John Crescimbeni said the meetings send a bad message. "If I was going to push a no-bid contract," he said, "I would try to distance myself from the actual vendor."

By Tia Mitchell

http://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-02-22/story/inside_the_fight_for_your

[BridgeTroll]

I am sure Peyton has "reasons"... he has been the one who has not articulated those reasons very well.  he says...

"The unfortunate part about this is it's been framed poorly from the beginning," Peyton said, "and it was framed by the people that want to kill the deal."

I disagree... he had the power to frame this as he wanted from the beginning.  He failed to do so.

Convince me... Mr Mayor.

[Lunican]

This is the mayors official explanation that was sent out on Jan 29th.

Dear Friends:

After many months of negotiating a contract for the disposal of solid waste at Trail Ridge Landfill, the city has reached an agreement to extend its contract with its current landfill operator, Waste Management â€" a move that saves taxpayers more than $200 million. As mayor, it is my duty to seek the best deal for the taxpayers of this city, and I am convinced that this agreement with Waste Management cannot be matched.

While the Jacksonville City Council must ultimately sign off on this deal, my staff worked very hard to represent the best interests of the taxpayer while at the bargaining table. Below, I have outlined the merits of the bill currently before the council.

Garbage is big business, and although we may only think about it when the collection at our home is missed, the management of waste is critical to our community’s continued economic development. A community’s failure to manage garbage collection well, or failure to have a quality landfill operating at a competitive price, directly affects the taxpayers’ bottom line. If the city’s current landfill space reaches capacity, which it is projected to do in five to seven years, we will be forced to stop development across Jacksonville and pay more than $30 million annually to haul waste out of the county.

The current proposal supports my desire to save taxpayer money, protect the city from future liability and prevent any disruption to the disposal of waste in our community. First, the city will save about $20 million on its existing contract with Waste Management, which was initially bid in 1991. Second, Waste Management will assume all environmental liability associated with operating a landfill, saving the city more than $150 million. In addition, it will also free up more than $30 million to meet other city needs.

The city is only able to realize these savings by extending its contract with Waste Management. I have met with independent waste disposal experts, who have no vested financial interest in this deal, and they have assured me that no other company could match, much less better, the proposed contract. If council chooses to bid the contract, more than $200 million in guaranteed savings will be lost, and taxpayers will foot the bill. Likewise, if the council chooses to bid the contract, it will trigger an immediate $30 million-plus cost to close the current site.

Opponents of this deal have chosen to focus on the politics and personalities of this debate, rather than the undeniable financial benefits to the taxpayer. The deal on the table was negotiated by city engineers who have years of environmental and landfill experience â€" not politicians, lawyers or public relations agents. If our opponents’ lobbyists are successful in clouding the rhetoric with scare tactics and misrepresentation, it will not only cost taxpayers millions of dollars, but Jacksonville could also be faced with a future landfill crisis that could shut down growth and development in our city.

I cannot, in good conscience, let that happen on my watch.

Respectfully,

John Peyton

Mayor

[BridgeTroll]

First, the city will save about $20 million on its existing contract with Waste Management, which was initially bid in 1991.

How?

Second, Waste Management will assume all environmental liability associated with operating a landfill, saving the city more than $150 million.

Why would we not require another bidder to assume the same liability?

If council chooses to bid the contract, more than $200 million in guaranteed savings will be lost,

Once again... Why?

Likewise, if the council chooses to bid the contract, it will trigger an immediate $30 million-plus cost to close the current site.

Do we not own the landfill?  Why must it be closed?

[jbm32206]

Sorry, but Peyton's letter is a pile of crap....there's little to nothing sincere about it. If this is such a wonderful deal, then why not open it up to bidding and let it stand on it's own merits. This violates the city procedures and it should go up for bidding, plain and simple.

[jbm32206]

Exactly!

[stjr]

First, kudos to the T-U for their coverage today of this issue.  While I wished it appeared a lot sooner than now, better late than never.  The graphics, pro/con table, and timeline were most helpful in conveying what is at stake and how we got here.  I thought the law professor's analysis and the mayor's interview were incisive as well and gave the neutral observer pause to think this one out more carefully.  As is the case, most times, civic issues aren't as black and white as they first appear. 

I believe that articles like this are critical to the survival of local media (not to mention the success of our community) and hope that all local media take the cue and start doing more pieces like it. (Imagine if our local electronic media produced a local version akin to 60 minutes or Nightline!) [P.S. - While it wasn't too long, I also liked the cover article in Folio telling us about the behind the scenes manipulations alleged at JPA in the recent cruise terminal lawsuit.]

The landfill issue, like mosts, may be more complex than meets the eye.  I think people's concerns and gripes relate to the ongoing lack of transparency that civic decisions lack time after time.  If our leaders are really acting in the interests of the community, they should be satisfied that the recommended decisions will hold up to public scrutiny.  When will they realize that backroom antics, subversion of processes, and downplaying of questions just fuel the speculation that these decisions are not in favor of the community?

Regardless of the merits, the Mayor, City Council, JAA, JTA, and the JPA have repeatedly shot themselves in the foot over the Landfill, Courthouse, Cruise Terminal, Craig Field, Skyway, BRT, Mass Transit, deals with developers, etc. by springing on the public at the last minute, or at least long after they have "locked in" their positions, issues of concern to the greater community without appropriate public forums and inputs.

 

[stjr]

MJ webmasters, please see my recent post under feedback.  This and other MJ bulletin boards are NOT having their threads listed on your home page's "Latest Discussion" listing displaying the last 8 active threads.  Please advise on a fix.  Thanks!

[stjr]

stjr.  Our board voted not to include the politics section on the daily feed of the front page after one of the forums conservative posters claimed that the 'liberal' opinions (which basically consisted of predictions that Obama might win the election, that the economy was heading for a crash, and that global warming was a concern to worry about) were 'destroying the credibility' of the site.

That poster then created such a circus of name calling and offensive photos that our board ended up voting to remove the national politics section from view of everyone except registered users.

I happen to agree with you on this, but we have yet to revisit the issue.

Stephen, thanks for the prompt reply.  Since these posts DO show under "Read the latest posts" as well as under the "Discussion" board lists, I think that MJ is getting out of the rain while already wet.  Assuming MJ retains "editorial" control of the site, certain posts may just require deletion when over the top rather than spoil it for all others.  Yahoo has a system whereby readers can call objectionable material material to their attention.  They will weigh the matter and delete it if they feel it is inappropriate.  Mostly this happens when certain 4 letter words are explicitly typed out.  It could also apply to inappropriate character assaults, especially of non-public figures, or something that amounts to liable.  [P.S. - A reminder the Feedback and Suggestion thread is also absent from the Home page.]

MJ should revisit my other feedback thread regarding what MJ should focus on.  I would like to suggest MJ consider subdividing the home page into FIRST COAST COMMUNITY ISSUES (i.e. meaty issues that can be influenced or controlled by the First Coast community), FIRST COAST CULTURE (local events, happenings, restaurants, night-life, area artists, off-beat subjects, etc, that have a root or two in the First Coast), and NON-LOCAL SUBJECTS (national and international topics, pet peeves, culture, special interests, travel, etc. that really are not directly or clearly related to the influence of people living on the First Coast).  Perhaps the left-right debates could be dumped into a PURELY POLITICS forum where those entering realize its more or less a no holds barred, not for the feint of heart, match of ideologies!  Maybe us moderates could get a few chuckles out of it 

[Charles Hunter]

... and some posters saw and ranted about left/right in every issue

I agree, good for the TU for bringing the landfill issue, literally, front and center.

[Lunican]

89.9 FM Special

    * One hour conversation with Jacksonville Mayor John Peyton about the controversy over the Trail Ridge Landfill and other issues.

Part 1: http://www.wjct.org/mp3/weekly/fccmar5a.mp3
Part 2: http://www.wjct.org/mp3/weekly/fccmar05b.mp3

[billy]

Are they going to open this up to multiple bids now?

[Springfielder]

let's hope they know now to open it up for bid. Waste Management can still bid,and let's see who has the best offer. There never should've been any suggest to the contrary