Treutlen Board of Commissioners Consider Bids for Trash Pick-Up Services

The Treutlen County Board of Commissioners considered two bids for curbside trash pick-up services during their monthly meeting on April 6 and a work session on April 8.

The Board received two bids for the contract: one from Ryland Environmental, which currently serves Treutlen County, and another from Amwaste. The proposals were both delivered in large boxes containing binders for the board to review, which Board Chairman Phil Jennings opened during the April 6 meeting.

Based on a 95 gallon cart, Ryland Environmental would charge $27 per can per month with an extra $13 per can for additional cans if billing were paid directly to Ryland. If billing were paid through Treutlen County, the company would charge $24 per can with an extra $13 per can for additional cans.

For rolloff prices per haul and per ton, Ryland would charge $175 per haul and $35 per ton. The company would also charge $5 per cubic yard for commercial dumpsters.

According to Amwaste’s proposal, the company would charge $16.25 per can per month with an extra $8 per can for additional cans. These prices are based on billing through Treutlen County, as the bid advertisement did not specify a request for direct billing.

Amwaste’s rolloff service would charge $375 per haul and $35 per ton. Amwaste would also not impose an extra fuel surcharge, as opposed to Ryland’s 4% fuel surcharge.

However, the board elected not to make a decision during the regular meeting, instead opting to take time to review the proposals in detail to make a more informed decision.

“I think [it] would be wise to our constituents to do that,” said Jennings.

The board also elected to set up a work session on April 8 to further discuss the proposals. Representatives from Ryland Environmental and Amwaste attended both meetings.

As the county already works with Ryland Environmental, most of the board’s questions were directed towards the Amwaste representatives to better understand their operations.

County Manager Joseph Glenn’s biggest concern and inquiry for the Amwaste representatives was their level of communication should residents or the county run into any issues with Amwaste’s service.

“That’s my biggest concern, really, is making sure if we bring you guys on, you’re going to answer the phone,” said Glenn.

According to the Amwaste representatives, Treutlen County would have a dedicated operations manager to maintain communication and address any concerns which may arise.

The representatives also said certain options not present in their proposal, such as direct billing and commercial dumpsters, could be made available should the county officials desire them.

The board did not make an official decision on the issue during the work session. Instead, the board agreed to either set up a called meeting to vote on the bids or to wait until their next regular meeting on May 4, after the bids had been reviewed by the county’s auditors.

The board also considered a quote for tracking devices meant for county vehicles and property. The devices were originally proposed by Board Member Rodney Meeks during the board’s March 2 regular meeting.

The tracking devices would allow county officials to track down stolen or mislaid property, as well as encouraging responsibility  and accountability among county employees regarding vehicles, he said. 

He also cited several calls he had received regarding “wives in cars” as a reason for the increased accountability, which Jennings also described as a “fun saga.” 

“I think if you had the ability to pull it up, see where it was live on a map, you would potentially catch some things that we hear about, or dispel rumors when we hear about things like that, too,” said Jennings during the March 2 meeting.

County Manager Glenn presented the board with a quote from FirstNet for $719.60 for 40 tracking devices with no extra fees, which Glenn described as “very reasonable.”

Glenn also clarified the 40 trackers were an example number given to FirstNet to gauge the company’s pricing, rather than a specific number the county needed. FirstNet also provides the Treutlen County government’s telephone services.

Treutlen County does not currently keep mileage logs for county vehicles. According to Jennings, the county spends approximately $350,000 to $400,000 on fuel annually, and so he considered the devices a potential cost saver.

Jennings also suggested the county could phase the trackers in by testing them on administrative vehicles prior to a full rollout.

“We could phase it in through a couple of departments, kind of make sure we understand how it works, or even just put it on the administrative vehicles,” said Jennings. “Just our vehicles to start out with, and then we can kind of understand the program, see how it works, and then if we want to expand it across, we can do that too.”

Board Member Meeks offered a motion to approve the purchase of up to 40 trackers to be implemented under Jennings’ proposed method, which passed unanimously.

On the topic of dash cams, Jennings clarified they had considered them, but would not implement them alongside the trackers. Instead, the trackers could be considered a “phase one” while the dash cams could be considered a “phase two.”

Meeks also offered a motion to approve two business licenses, which passed unanimously.