Yesterday, the Commission candidates, except Will Tudor, to whom Mac Kennedy isn't allowed to send this, got a detailed and extensive recapitulation from Mac about Mac's conversation with a representative of Waste Management (WM), a contractor who collects and hauls waste. WM has very many contracts in very many municipalities, probably all over the country. Mac was talking to this representative about what the Village is looking for, or prefers, in services a solid waste contractor would deliver.
To make a long story short, WM declined to bid on the Village's needs, because the strictures were too great and too perilous for the contractor. According to whatever Mac discussed with the WM rep, there were too many risks, mostly fiscal, and we were too small a client for them to be willing to take this level of risk on. (Don't fuss with me about the terminal preposition. I'm not in the mood.)
So, I wrote back to Mac, and to the other openly copied recipients of this e-mail, to say that I thought WM was right, and that it was certainly not in their interest to take this level of risk. Certainly not with little us. And more important, and the reason for this post, it's not in our interest to contract with a solid waste removal company, which we then jeopardize by making it either too difficult, impossible, or just not adequately profitable for them to do what we want done. There's a big picture here, and it includes more than just us. As I put it to Mac, in a different context, we need them at least as much as they might in theory need us.
I reviewed with Mac some of the problems we have increasingly confronted with WastePro, our current solid waste removal contractor, and how we and they colluded to set them up to experience those problems. Which have naturally been visited on us.
In 2014, when we outsourced whatever of sanitation wasn't already outsourced, we agreed to contract with WastePro. I'm not sure I remember exactly correctly, but I think WastePro proposed to charge us the lowest yearly fee. And they agreed to do the whole solid waste removal task, including the part that was already outsourced to MSV. They offered to do it in 2-3 days per week, instead of the five days per week we then had someone's (ours or MSV's) trucks on the road. They agreed to do it by hand, instead of using the state-of-the-art automated container lifters. Because some of us didn't want automated container lifters. Because...? They agreed to go to side yards of BP residents who simply didn't want to bring out their own containers, and they would bring those containers out to the truck to empty them, and return them to the side yards. And put the lids back on, nice and tidy.
Well, we didn't look out for WastePro, and they didn't look out for themselves. They agreed to what was impossible, and over time, they have been increasingly, and increasingly conspicuously, unable to do what we asked them to do, and what they carelessly agreed to do.
We outsourced sanitation, and agreed to hire WastePro, in about the spring of 2014. I was on the Commission then. It was before the end of my term, at the end of 2016, that some Village residents were already complaining about garbage, etc, not being picked up at the right time. First, it was complaints that the pick-ups were extending too late in the day. Then, it was pick-ups that weren't even occurring on the originally agreed-upon day. And already, even when I was still on the Commission, I suggested to WastePro that they had made an agreement they couldn't keep, and that they should perhaps add a day, and/or more trucks. It was more important that the garbage get picked up on the day Village residents expected this to happen than that we name that tune in two or three notes. WastePro couldn't do it all, and we couldn't have it all. And for a rock bottom price.
The problem, as I wrote to Mac, was that each part of this dynamic looked out only for itself, and did not apply perspective to realize what this would mean to the larger dynamic. And it's necessary to do that, if anyone expects a system to work adaptively, and be able to sustain itself. We didn't know we were asking too much of WastePro. They're...Pros. They should have known. But we found out, and so did they. And if it was still unclear, WM reminded us that asking for a lowball price, with no built-in CPI, non-automated collection, and other -- I'm sorry to say -- immature foolishness was not doable. No, they wouldn't even bother to bid on our job. They didn't need to waste their own time talking to us about champagne tastes and beer budgets. We had to function as part of a much broader system than just ourselves, and WM concluded we were not, apparently, willing to do it.
Which raises questions about the contractors, which still and again includes WastePro, that are willing to bid for the VBP contract. We were kidding ourselves. Are they kidding themselves, too? If we don't want to continue to complain and be unhappy, we're going to have to look at this much more broadly, and fairly, than we did in 2014.
We are VBP. But we also have to be, or at least very clearly understand, all the other parts of the system. We need to speak their language.
We have been at a huge disadvantage since the end of 2016. We have had a grossly dysfunctional government/Commission, and no (competent) management. It's possible all of that changes next week. I hope so. But what's most important is that we expand our focus from just ourselves (our personal selves, and our little Village selves) to all of the other interconnected parts. They are interconnected. And like it or not, we depend on them. That becomes much clearer to us when something doesn't function right, and it fails us, and we find ourselves complaining and unhappy.
I’m reminded of an incredibly wise woman’s words: “Generally, change in our society is incremental, I think. Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time.” (Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg)
ReplyDeleteThe first step in outsourcing VBP solid waste services was contracting with MSV for collection of recycling; before that the Village kept a large multi-section dumpster in the empty lot (current Village Hall site) and noisy deposits of glass, metal and paper where made by residents 24/7. The second step was an RFP competitive bidding process through which Waste Pro was selected for the balance (and eventually all) of the service. The Administration at the time tried to make the conversion as seamless as possible, keeping the service like its predecessor, and Waste Pro accepted those terms.
But it proved to be a bumpy transition, nowhere near perfect, and regardless of nostalgic comments to the contrary, the in-house version was similarly far from perfect.
I recall that a mechanical option was tested early on, and it was deemed to be too damaging to Village tree canopy, which admittedly needed general trimming and lifting to permit unimpeded passage for other through trucks that service the Village.
In the area of recycling, we know from news reports 2+ years ago, industry-wide the market for recycled materials has dried up as foreign governments are no longer accepting these materials from the U.S.
So, there have been developments within and outside of our jurisdiction that caused significant impact on the service. I agree with you that we put ourselves at a disadvantage when we do not have adequate information to understand the bigger picture. And, although Village communications have improved in 2020, not much of it has been on the topic of solid waste collection and disposal.
The agreement with Waste Pro included terms for assistance and monetary participation in educational campaigns to inform the end-users how best to take advantage of the service – not happening. It also included quarterly reporting – data that would help decisionmakers understand the tonnage, category and end disposal of solid waste collected from the Village – also not happening. Without these important elements of information and education, we have been kept in the dark, unable to take in incremental growth/change in the industry – stuck in 2014, remembering vaporously the service that used to be and wanting to get back there.
What most struck me about Mac’s conversation with WP’s representative was a worker’s risk of injury associated with manual pick-up. Here is someone immersed in the industry tell us that they rely on automation and avoid service features that increase liability and risk of work-related injury. And, still, I hear some of our neighbors insist upon specialized, non-mechanical, labor intense solid waste collection services.
These decisions will be made after my term is ended, so I feel free to say that IMHO, it is time to take the next step to Real Change; Time to move the VBP to the current standards of collection and current standards of worker protections.
Oh, Rox... I'm so gonna miss you, girl.
DeleteI moved here in '05, and recycling was already being handled by MSV. So your reference is before that.
Proper Commissions would have done tree work, which needed and needs doing anyway. We had a Village-wide servicing once when Heidi was here. Everything fell apart and died at the end of '16. (Who, me? Harp?) Anyway, yes, we need to make room for modernization, which works better and saves the health of laborers/employees.
Right, my understanding of the state of recycling is about like yours is. Except Mac's new information is that WM runs their own domestic program. Could be.
I'm not that interested in demonizing WastePro. They made their mistakes, and we made ours. As you allude to, much of what is so fondly "remembered" before 2014 is folklore and deprived of essential context. And after 2016 (what, again? Knock it off, Fred!), we were no longer interacting adaptively with them, to identify, understand, and try to rectify problems. We ignored the end of our contract, and we have simply relied on used Band-Aids to extend an increasingly dysfunctional service contract, or, as Mac puts it, kick the can down the road. There must be about a case of those cans at this point.
I have no doubt your last paragraph will sooner (I hope) or later be realized.
You're beyond amazing, Rox. Thank you.
Fred
Biscayne Park residents need to kick Mac down the road he’s not capable in capable a nightmare we need to vote him out
ReplyDeleteMe myself and I Describes the whole Biscayne Park in a nutshell past commissioners current commissioner is past mayors current mayors
ReplyDelete