News
Final decision on Greater Shepparton waste contracts made
After one abandoned tender process and another established to replace it, Greater Shepparton City Council has chosen the companies that will share more than $120 million worth of waste collection contracts over a possible 15 years.
Hold tight - we’re checking permissions before loading more content
Councillors met for an additional council meeting on Tuesday, March 19, to decide on the kerbside collection contracts first sent to tender in June 2022.
Foott was awarded the contract to undertake bin collection services for all forms of kerbside waste, and it was also successful in its tender for bulk transport services, which includes the transportation of waste to its correct facility.
Cleanaway was successful in its tender for the two contracts for the acceptance and processing of glass and recyclables.
BioMix was chosen as the acceptance and processing service for food organics and garden organics, replacing the previous contract held by Western Composting.
The contracts were awarded for a period of 7.5 years with an optional 7.5-year extension available and will start at the end of the interim contracts.
These interim contracts were previously awarded to Veolia for kerbside collection services and recycling processing and Western Composting for food organics and garden organics from November 1, 2023, until January 22, 2025.
In March 2023, the value of the contracts was originally suggested to be more than $75 million over the 15-year period by Cr Anthony Brophy.
The total value of the combined contracts is now confirmed to be $126,787,442.
Cr Brophy, who moved the motion on Tuesday, said this number was a more accurate reflection of the cost of the processes involved.
“It had not factored a number of variants in, including compounded CPI increases, tonnage increases, etc,” he said.
“Incredulous as it might seem, we did not know the complete cost of the previous tender, although we were at the time deciding on whether to accept the tender and that process.”
Cr Geoff Dobson, who seconded the motion, said despite the struggles during the long process, it was important to look forward.
“At the first attempt of getting this done (the abandoned Hume process) I voted in favour of the then motion,” Cr Dobson said.
“That’s water under the bridge now, and I fully endorse what we’ve got here today.”
Councillors also approved an operational budget allocation of $80,000 per annum over the term of the contract to contribute towards contract management and monitoring of performance and for chief executive Fiona Le Gassick to negotiate and execute the contract documents as required.
The motion was passed unanimously by councillors, with the exception of Cr Greg James, who was absent from the meeting.
City of Greater Shepparton Mayor Shane Sali said councillors were confident in their decision.
“This a fit-for-purpose waste service for Greater Shepparton,” Cr Sali said.
“Which is, first and foremost, the most important part, but also the recommendation that is in front of us gives greater service and economic outcomes for our community.
“I think that needs to be highlighted because that is the main factor of what I think we’re all striving to achieve, and I think this recommendation in front of us delivers great outcomes for our community’s waste needs.”
The decision ends a drawn-out procurement process that started in 2022 with the Resource Recovery Collective – Hume tender.
That independent process recommended the ASX-listed company Cleanaway for key kerbside contracts.
That recommendation was criticised by some prominent local business figures and former councillors, though, for not giving enough weight to the benefits of supporting local tenderers, such as the unsuccessful Foott.
The recommendation was ultimately rejected by a majority of councillors, and this new process was launched.
At the meeting, Cr Fern Summer congratulated the council for taking another look at the tender last year.
“Despite enormous pressure to conform to the Hume tender, councillors had the courage to bring the tender back in-house,” Cr Summer said.
“The sky didn’t fall, excess costs were nowhere near levels predicted and significant savings have been made.”
Cr Dinny Adem said despite feeling the same level of confidence in the recommendations made in the previous Hume process last year as he did with the current motion, it was ultimately a better solution.
“The time that elapsed between the two has evidently resulted in an eventually better costing and charge structure even after considering the extra cost of conducting our own tender process and other costs associated with the delay,” Cr Adem said.
Cr Seema Abdullah said that although the recommendations last year were the best decisions at the time, the processes taken to determine the current recommendations had shown this was the best way to go.
“This is 2024, and the current recommendation and motion in front of us is based on the processes and responses that we have received in this round,” Cr Abdullah said.
“I’m supportive of the recommendation.”
Cr Sam Spinks, while agreeing with the decision, also highlighted the struggle that came with trying to find the “best outcome” for processes such as these.
“Ultimately, for better or worse, a year ago there was not a majority of councillors who felt comfortable with moving ahead with the contract in front of us and the decision that was in front of us at the time,” Cr Spinks said.
“At what point do you stop striving for a best outcome?”
Cr Ben Ladson echoed support for the work the council team had put into the tender process.