HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.con.156.2006
CLERK'S CHECK LIST
FOR CONTRACTS SUBMITTED TO CLERK AND RECORDER FOR
SCANNING/ARCHIVING
CONTRACT #: I c;b - J-fYDf,o
Originating Department/Division: Resource Recovery
Contact Person: Chris Hoofnagle
Project Name: Solid Waste Master Plan
Phone #: 429-2882
o BOCC AGENDA ITEM
(HOCC signature required)
[83STAFF AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
(per Revised Procurement Code 7/2005)
Check procurement type:
DNone DInformal [83Formal DSole Source DEmergency DState Bid 0
Check Contract Tvpe:
[83ServiceslMaintenance
DLicense/Use
DLease
DConstruction
DGoods, Equipment, Supplies
DOther(e.g. revenue)
Budget Line Item/Ledger Number 416.68.92664.86851
DEmployment (for county employees)
DIntergovermnental Agreement (Requires BOCC Action)
DNon-Profit
DQuasi-Public
DGrant Agreements (Requires BOCC Action)
DChange Order/Contract Amendment
Dollar Amount: $60,000
ContractorlBusiness
Associates
Contract Execution
Automatic Renewal
SERA
Complete Name: Skumatz Economic Research
1-16-2007
NO
Contract End Date: 9-30-2007
Term of Contract: 11-1-2006thru9-30-2007
All Contracts should be proofed for the following:
[83No Pages Missing
[gIIf a Page is Left Intentionally Blank -Note on Page
[83Page numbered consecutively
[83All Signatures Affixed
[83All Dates Filled In
[83All Other Blanks Filled In
[83All Exhibits Attached
[83All Legal Descriptions Attached (if appropriate)
[83Notice of AwardIProceed Attached (if appropriate)
[83Special Instructions for Finance Department:
[83Sent to Clerk and Recorder for Scanning! Archiving
[83Authorized Staff Person's Name: Chris Hoofnagle
BY CHECKING ABOVE AND ENTERING NAME, THE AUTHORIZED STAFF
PERSON INDICATES THAT DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PROOFED AND READY
FOR SCANNING.
Note: Clerk's Office will keep original documents in compliance with Colorado State
Archives retainage schedule.
Amended 10_16_06
\
Rev. 10/24/05 dq
CONTRACT FOR PROVISION OF SERVICES
Contract #
Ledger #
156-2006
416.68.92664.82111
THIS CONTRACT is made and entered by and between the Pitkin County Board
of County Commissioners ("County") and Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc.
(SERA) (hereinafter "Contractor").
1. Term. The term of this contract is from November 1,2006 to September 30,
2007. At the expiration of the initial term, the contract may be extended for an additional
term of one (1) year by the express written consent of both parties.
2. Contractor's Obligations. Contractor shall see Appendix 1 of this contract for
scope of work from the Comprehensive Solid Waste Master Plan RFP.
3. Compensation and Expenses. Invoicing. Payment and Offset. The County shall
compensate Contractor for its services in accordance with the Project Budget and
Schedule set out in Paragraph 2. It is expressly understood and agreed that in no event
will the total compensation and reimbursement to be paid hereunder exceed the sum of
$69.935 for all services rendered. By contract or amendment, the County and Contractor
may reallocate the budget among project tasks if the total budget amount remains
unchanged. Contractor shall invoice for the project monthly based on hours worked, with
payment expected within thirty (30) days of invoice, but any payment by the County may
be offset by any amount the Contractor owes the County for any reason
Retainage. Payment of five percent (5%) of each invoice will be withheld by the County
until the Contractor's obligations are completed. In the event the Contractor incurs time
and expenses in excess of the total compensation stated above, no compensation for said
additional time and expenses shall be required to be paid by the County without written
amendment to this contract executed by the County.
-1-
'}
4. County's Exclusive Ownership of Work Product. Drawings, specifications,
guidelines and other documents prepared by Contractor in connection with this contract
shall be the property of the County. However, Contractor shall have the right to utilize
such documents in the course of its marketing, professional presentations, and for other
business purposes. Contractor assigns to County the copyrights to all work prepared,
developed, or created pursuant to this contract, . ncluding the right to: 1) reproduce the 0ZJ
work; 2) prepare derivative works; 3) distribute ies to the public; 4) perform the ~ '-.:
works publicly; and 5) to display the work publicly. ontractor shall have right to use ~
materials produced in the course of this contract for m ting purposes and professional
presentations, articles, speeches and other business purposes. .w~t 1"4 seUo DPA ~ J -l-o ~
~:.lWI k~c.l.IJ.)J.UAu cIoO ~
5. Pitkin County's Obligations. Pitkin County shall administer this contract through 'btfJ. .
a County Representative. Chris HoofnagIe, Solid Waste Manager will manage the
project as the County's Representative. In the event that Chris Hoofnagle is not
available, Justina Potter shall assume the County Representative's duties. The services
provided and products delivered by the Contractor under this contract will be subject to
review by the County's Representatives, or a designee, for compliance with Contractor's
obligations prior to final payment.
6. Termination Prior to Expiration of Contract Term. The County has the right to
terminate this contract, with or without cause, by giving written notice to the Contractor
of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. Such notice shall be given
at least ten (10) days before the effective date of such termination. In such event all
finished or unfinished documents, data, studies and reports prepared by the Contractor
pursuant to this contract shall become the County's property. Contractor shall be entitled
to receive compensation in accordance with the contract for any satisfactory work
completed pursuant to the terms of this contract prior to the date oftermination. Not
withstanding the above, Contractor shall not be relieved ofliability to the County for
damages sustained by the County by virtue of any breach of the contract by the
Contractor.
7. Independent Contractor Status.
A. The parties to this contract intend that the relationship between them
contemplated by the contract is that of independent Contractor.
Contractor, and any agent, employee, or servant of Contractor shall not be
deemed to be an employee, agent, or servant of Pitkin County.
B. Contractor is not required to offer his services exclusively to Pitkin
County under this contract. Contractor may choose to work for other
individuals or entities during the term of this contract, provided that the
basic services and deliverable products required under this contract are
submitted in the manner and on the schedule defined under this contract.
C. Contractor warrants that all work produced will conform to all applicable
industry standard of care, skill and diligence in the performance of
Contractor's obligations under this contract.
1
- -
'2
D. Contractor shall not attempt to oversee or supervise the work or actions of
any Pitkin County employee, servant or agent in the course of completing
work under this contract.
E. Contractor is not entitled to any Workers' Compensation benefits through
Pitkin County and is responsible for payment of any federal, state, FICA
and other income taxes.
8 Assignability. This contract is not assignable by either party. Any use of
subcontractors by the Contractor for performance of this contract must be accepted in
writing by the County.
9. Binding Arbitration. Any disputes arising out of this contract shall be subject to
binding arbitration. The parties agree that any disputes concerning the terms and
conditions of this contract shall be submitted and finally settled by arbitration.
Arbitration shall be conducted pursuant to the rules of the American Arbitration
Association and shall be presided over by the Pitkin County Hearing Officer appointed to
arbitrate Pitkin County contract disputes. Costs of the arbitration shall be awarded to the
substantially prevailing party.
10. Severability. In the event that any provision of this contract shall be held to be
invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this contract shall remain valid and
binding upon the parties hereto
11. Integration and Modification.
A. This contract represents the entire and integrated contract between the
County and the Contractor and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or contract,
either written or oral. This contract may be amended only by written contract signed by
both the County and the Contractor.
B. The County may, from time to time, request changes in the scope of
services of the Contractor to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including the
increase or decrease in the amount of the Contractor's compensation, which are mutually
agreed upon between the County and the Contractor, shall be in writing and upon
execution shall become part of this contract.
12. Indemnity.
The Contractor (including, by definition here and hereinafter, its officials, employees, agents
and representatives, subcontractors and suppliers), shall and hereby does release, discharge,
indemnify and hold harmless the County of Pitkin and its officials, employees, agents and
representatives from and against liability for any claim, demand, loss, damages, penalty,
judgment, expenses, costs (including costs of investigation and defense), fees (including
reasonable attorney and expert witness fees) or compensation in any form or kind
whatsoever for any bodily injury, death, personal injury or property damage arising out of or
in connection with any negligent act, intentional act, error or omission by the Contractor,
- s -
'-I,
and for any consequential liability alleged to accrue against the County on account of the
Contractor's acts, errors or omissions; provided, however, that such indemnity shall not be
construed as an indemnity for bodily injury or property damage arising from the sole negli-
gence of the County or its employees.
The Contractor further shall investigate, process, respond to, adjust, provide defense for and
defend, payor settle all claims, demands, or lawsuits related hereto at its sole expense and
shall bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, even if the claim, demand or lawsuit
is groundless, false or fraudulent.
13. Insurance.
A. In whole or in part, the Contractor shall secure and maintain for the term
ofits contractual relationship with the County such insurance policies, from companies
licensed in the State of Colorado, as will protect itself, the County and others as specified,
from claims for bodily injuries, death, personal injury or property damage, which may
arise out of or result from the Contractor's acts, errors or omissions. The following insur-
ance coverage, at or above the limits indicated and including such endorsements as are
indicated by an "X", are required:
1. Statutory Workers' Compensation: Colorado statutory minimums
2. Commercial General Liability - ISO 1998 Form or equivalent
(With County named additional insured)
Each Occurrence Limit
$1.000.000.00
General Aggregate Limit
$2.000.000.00
Products/Completed Operations Aggregate Limit
$2.000.000.00
Comprehensive Form (All risks) to include:
~ Premises/Operations
Underground, Explosion & Collapse Hazard
~ Products/Completed Operations
~ Contractual Liability
~ Independent Contractors and Subcontractors
~ Broad Form Property Damage
~ Personal Injury
3. Business Auto Coverage:
Combined Single Limit Liability (each accident)
$1.000.000.00
4.
Special Coverages (check as appropriate and insert amount):
(1) Performance Bond
Labor and Material
Payment Bond
-1-
~
(2) Professional Errors and Omissions
(3) Aircraft Liability
(4) Owner's Protective
(5) Builder's Risk
(6) Boiler and Machinery
(7) Loss of Use Insurance
(8) Pollution Liability
(9)Crime, including Employee Dishonesty Coverage, or
Fidelity Bond
B. Proof of Insurance:
1. To provide evidence of the required insurance coverage, copies of
Certificates ofInsurance in a form acceptable to the County shall be filed with the
County through the representative identified in Paragraph 5, no later than ten (10)
calendar days prior to commencement of operations affecting the County. Failure
to file or maintain acceptable Certificates ofInsurance with the County is agreed
to be a material breach of any contract. These Certificates of Insurance shall
contain a provision that coverage afforded under the policies will not be canceled
or materially altered unless at least thirty (30) calendar days prior written notice
by certified mail, return receipt requested (effective upon proper mailing), has
been sent to the County (through the County's Risk Department). (For purposes
of this provision, "materially altered" shall mean a change affecting the
coverage's required herein, including a change to policy limits as set out in the
then-current policy declarations page).
Simultaneously with the Certificates oflnsurance, the Contractor shall file
with the County's Risk Department (and promptly update, as necessary) a certified
statement as to claims pending against the required coverages, reserves established
on account of such claims, defense costs expended and amounts remaining on policy
limits.
2. In addition, these Certificates oflnsurance shall contain the
following clauses:
a.
b.
The clause "other insurance provisions," in a policy in which
the County of Pitkin holds a Certificate, shall not apply to the
County of Pitkin.
The insurance companies issuing the policy or policies
hereunder shall have no recourse against the County of Pitkin
for payment of any premiums or for assessments under any
form of policy.
Any and all deductibles in the above-described insurance
policies shall be assumed by and be for the amount of, and at
the sole expense of the Contractor.
Location of operations shall be: "all operations and locations
at which work for the referenced Project is being done."
c.
d.
-5-
~
3. Certificates ofInsurance for all renewal policies shall be delivered to
the County's Representative at least fifteen (15) days prior to a policy's expiration
date except for any policy expiring on the expiration date of this contract or there-
after.
4. The County reserves the right to request and receive a copy of any
policy and any policy endorsement at any time during the term of this contract.
14. Exemptions and Preferences. All purchases of construction or building or any
other materials for this contract shall not include Federal Excise Taxes or Colorado State
or local sales or use taxes. Pitkin County is exempt from such taxes under registration
numbers 98-02624 and 84-78000-5K.
15. Records. The Contractor shall maintain comprehensive, complete and accurate
books, records, and documents concerning its performance relating to this contract for a
period of three (3) years after final payment under the contract and the County shall have
the right within the three (3) year period to inspect and audit these books, records and
documents, upon demand, in a reasonable manner and at reasonable times, for the
purpose of determining, by accepted accounting and auditing standards, compliance with
all provisions of the contract and applicable law.
16. Contract Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this contract was made in
accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is
agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado.
17. Attorney's Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the
provisions of this contract beyond the arbitration described in Paragraph 9, the substantially
prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
18. Governmental Immunity. Contractor agrees and understands that Pitkin County is
relying on and does not waive, by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations
or terms (presently $150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other
rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity
Act, 24-10-101, et. Seq., c.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to
Pitkin County or any of its officers, agents or employees. Further, nothing in this contract
shall be construed or interpreted to require or provide for indemnification of the Contractor
by the County for any injury to any person or any property damage whatsoever which is
caused by the negligence or other misconduct of the County or its agent or employees.
19. Current Year Obligations. The parties acknowledge and agree that any payments
provided for hereunder or requirements for future appropriations shall constitute only
currently budgeted expenditures of Pitkin County. Pitkin County's obligations under this
contract are subject to Pitkin County's annual right to budget and appropriate the sums
necessary to provide the services set forth herein. No provisions of the contract shall
constitute a mandatory charge or requirement in any ensuing fiscal year beyond the then
current fiscal year of Pitkin County. No provision of the contract shall be construed or
- (;-
1
interpreted as creating a multiple-fiscal year direct or indirect debt or other financial
obligation of Pitkin County within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory debt
limitation. This contract shall not directly or indirectly obligate Pitkin County to make
any payments beyond those appropriated for Pitkin County's then current fiscal year. No
provisions of this contract shall be construed to pledge or create a lien on any class or
source of Pitkin County's moneys, nor shall any provision of this contract restrict the
future issuance of Pitkin County's bonds or any obligations payable from any class or
source of Pitkin County's money.
20. Notice. Any written notice required by this contract shall be deemed delivered
through any of the following: (1) hand delivery to the person at the address below; (2)
delivery by facsimile with confirmation of receipt to the fax number below; or (3) within
three (3) days of being sent certified first class mail, postage prepaid, return receipt
requested addressed as follows:
A.
To Pitkin County:
Chris Hoofnagle
76 Service Center Road
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Fax (970) 923-2043
with copies to:
Pitkin County Attorney's Office
530 E. Main Street, #302
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Fax: (970) 920-5198
B. To Contractor:
Skumatz Economic Research Associates, inc.
Lisa Skumatz, Ph.D., principle
762 Eldorado Drive
Superior, Colorado 80027
(303) 494-1178 ph
(303) 494-1177 fax
skumatz@serainc.com
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this contract as of the date first set
out herein above.
:~~~, k.
Title f'1l\t-Jt..lPA-\.., ~~ 'zJulblc.
Date
-"1-
~
BOARD of COUNTY COMMISIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO:
By:
Je,v-
r~, County Manager
-'ij-
1- II, - tJ"1
Date
ll&~61
Date
~
Af f'ff\1t)!1-, 1
SKUMATZ ECONOMIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.
. Consulting to Government & Utilities
Response to RFP from Pitkin County
DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE SOLID
WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY
Submitted to:
Mr. Chris Hoofnagle, Solid Waste Manager
Pitkin County Soiid Waste
76 Service Center Road
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone: 970i923-3487 (970i923-2043 fax)
Submitted by:
Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. (SERA), 762 Eldorado Drive, Superior, CO 80027
With subcontractors Kies Strategies, intermountain Corporate Affairs and Corona Research
September 19, 2006
"PROPOSALS FOR COMPREHENSIVE SOLID
WASTE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT"
SERAlKIEsJlNTERMOUNTAlN/CORONA PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKlN COUNTY iii
APPENDIX I
\0
ORGANIZATION OF PROPOSAL
1. MANAGEMENT AND QUALIFICATIONS ......................................................................................................................1
1.1 TEAM CONTACT INFORMATION. .... ............................ ........ ... .... ... ....... ........ .............. ....... .... ... ........ ............ ..... .... .... .....1
1.2 BRIEF STATEMENT I UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT ..................................................................................................1
1.3 WHY THE SERA TEAM? .... ................... ... .... ... ......................... ..................... .......... ................. .... ... ........ ........ ..........2
1.4 PAST PROJECTS AND REFERENCES ..... ........................... ......... ............. ... .... ... .... ... ............ ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... ......3
2. UNDERSTANDING AND TASKS / APPROACH FOR THE PROJECT .............................................................................6
COMMUNITY FORUMS ..... ........ .................. ..................... ............... ...... .................. .... .... ... .... ........................... ......... .....10
STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS/PRESENTA TIONS .. ...... ...................... ... .... ....... .... .......... ............... ... ......... .... ....... .... ........ ..... ..... 11
ADVANTAGES OF A TELEPHONE SURVEy...... .... ... .... ... .... ... ......................... .... .... ................. ........ .... .... ..... ... .... ........ ..... .... .14
WORK PlAN.... .... ......... ................... ... .... ... .... .... .......... ....... ........... .... ... .......... ... .... ........... .... .... .... ............ .... ........ ..... ..14
PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY SCHEDULE ....... .... ... .... .... ..................... .............. ...... .... .......... ........ ........ ..... ............... ............. ..15
OPTIONAL INTERVIEWS WITH SAMPLE OF BUSiNESSES............................................................................................17
3. TEAM ORGANIZATION, STAFFING PLAN, BUDGET, & TIMELINE..............................................................................18
3.1 TEAM ASSIGNED TO THE PROJECT AND ROLES ............................................................................................................ 18
3.2 PROPOSED STAFFING PLAN AND BUDGET ................................................................................................................... 19
4. AUXILIARY INFORMATION, TEAM QUALIFICATIONS, RESUMES/BIOS, AND PUBLlCATIONS...................................21
4.1 CONFLICTS AND ADMINISTRATION ISSUES................................. ......................... ........ ......................................... ..... ...21
4.2 BACKGROUND ON THE PROPOSED FIRMS ...................................................................................................................21
4.3 PROJECT TEAM RESUMES AND BIOS .................................................................................................................25
4.4 PUBLlCATIONs............... ............................ ..................... ...................... ....... ........... .......... ......... ......... ................. ..56
SERNKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN/CORONA PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE fv1ASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY
IV
\\
1. MANAGEMENT AND QUAL/FICA TIONS
1.1 Team Contact Information
Prime Contractor
Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. (SERA)
762 Eldorado Drive, Superior, CO 80027
Phone: 303/494-1178 FAX: 303/494-1177; cell: 303/9134229
Email: SkumalzCWserainc.com
Primary Contact: Usa A. Skumalz, Ph.D., Principal
Web site: www.serainc.com
(Woman owned firm, established 1990, incorporated 1995)
Subcontractor:
Intermountain Corporate Affairs
1675 Boradway, Sufte 1850, Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303/534-5409 x 113 FAX: 303/530-3222
Email: dkramer@Jintermountainca.com
Contact: Drew Kramer
Subcontractor:
Kies Strategies
50 Plata Court, Novato, Califomia 94947
Phone: 415/209-0321
Email: delvnkCWcomcast.net
Contact: Delyn Kies
Subcontractor:
Corona Research, Inc.
1630 Wefton street, Suite 525, Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303/894-8246; Kevin@coronaresearch.com
Contact: Kevin Raines
1.2 Brief Statement! Understanding of the Project
Pitkin County's desire to address their landfill through the development of a Comprehensive Soiid Waste Master Plan
will integrate both public involvement and industry experts to create an innovative guide to their solid waste system
over the next 25 years. This plan will lead the Pitkin County solid waste system up to, during, and through its
eventual closure.
The Solid Waste Master Plan process must incorporate a number of goals toward its completion including:
Evaluating the current waste management system and integrating public preferences within this
analysis.
Draft a plan for maximum economic and lifespan efficiency of the current solid waste system.
Analyze and recommend measures to ensure the longevity of the recycling program after
landfili closure.
This SWMP will be created with the continued input from the public and engage the public in every step of the
process. Recommendations for a draft will be presented to the public and the advisory board will be consulted with
the plan. Input and comments from both sources will be Integrated in the draft plan. By taking in to account all
aspects of solid waste management from fiscal concerns, alternatives in waste diversion, waste-to-energy process
and future projections, an original and financially responsible Comprehensive Solid Waste Master Plan can be
developed and given to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption.
SERAlKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SaUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY
\}
1.3 Why The SERA Team?
We believe the SERA team brings several unique advantages to this project:
. Experience with similar projects and options modeling work: This team conducted a very well-received
- and similar - project for Fort Collins, We conducted tasks to understand the solid waste system,
measured current performance, worked with a stakeholder group, identified options, modeled options,
gathered and incorporated input from surveys (residential and commerciai), assessed tonnage diversion
and costs for more than 50 program / policy I facility options, ran a public meeting process, and prepared
recommended program options for the City, We provided a user-friendly model at the end of the project for
use by the City in crafting and revising the next generation of programs, We have conducted similar work
for CU-Boulder, Snohomish County, and scores of others, We have deveioped models that estimate
diversion potential, integrating forecasts of waste streams, waste composition, and program design options
to allow scenario analysis build tailored and appropriate and cost-effective options for Pitkin County;
. Excellent quality public outreach specialists in Intermountain Corporate Affairs, assisted by Susie
Gordon who has strong qualifications in building informed consent with the public, In previous work in solid
waste, Intermountain was successful in achieving excellent attendance at the meetings, and crafted an
effective environment for providing input to residents and receiving feedback from them in a practical,
usable way,
. Survey and Databases for Solid Waste Impacts: SERA has collected and assembled data on recycling
and diversion programs, tonnage, costs, diverted materials, and other topics from more than 1,500 solid
waste agencies around the nation, We have used soiid survey methods for gathering the information, and
are well-experienced in devising survey instruments and techniques to gather useful, credible information on
the same types of topics requested for this project. There are few, if any, consulting firms in the nation that
have as much experience on program and diversion-related data as does SERA, Pitkin County can be
confident the data will support the analytical needs desired by the project - and beyond, Locai, regional,
and national in-depth knowledge of practical, feasible options for programs and facility options (Skumatz,
Gordon, and Kies), as well as access to national experts to assist as needed, SERA aiso maintains a list of
more that 100 program options, policies, and strategies that have been implemented in communities around
the US and internationally,
. Experience Preparing Comprehensive Solid Waste Master Plans: Kies, Gordon, and Skumatz have
experience preparing solid waste comprehensive plans, master plans, and implementation plans for .
communties around the nation, Delyn Kies prepared these documents for Bend Oregon, locations in Hawaii
and eisewhere, Gordon prepared comprehensive plans for Fort Collins, and Skumatz prepared key pieces
of Comprehensive Plans for Seattle and the States of Oregon, Iowa, and Massachusetts"
. Ability to Collect Data from Local Stakeholders: SERA and Kies Strategies have conducted detailed,
statistical surveys, as well as more qualitative interviews and focus groups for clients across the nation,
SERA and Kies Strategies have conducted detailed telephone interviews with haulers, and commercial
stakeholders for scores of projects across the nation, including work for Fort Collins (CO), Berkeley,
Alameda County, San Jose, Santa Clarita, and Porterville (CA), Snohomish County and Tukwila (WA), West
Jordan (UT), Boulder (CO), Hillsboro (OR), and Honolulu,
. Strong Survey Firm: If the optional survey task is selected, we bring a high-quality firm to bear on the
work, Corona Research is a nation-wide survey research firm with exceptional experience and an extensive
portfOliO of customer surveys for energy utility and other clients on homeowner attitudinal, behavioral, and
other issues, Their firm includes a multidisciplinary team of experts in survey sampling, project design,
primary data collection, and analysis, We believe they are a critical component to this team because they
are large enough - with sufficient CA TI stations - to conduct the survey work very quickly, They have
conducted residential survey work for clients across the country, have demonstrated the quality of their
work, and have a 100% record working with our project team in delivering high quality data, and an
exceptional report on time and on budget. ,
. Project Expertise, Quality of Work, Reputation: Our firms have nationwide reputations in conducting
work of precisely this type, We have published widely based on our survey data and analysis, including at
least a score of trade journai articles in Resource Recycling, MSW Management, Biocycle, and others on
these topics, We have many long-term I repeat clients, owing to our quality of project, value, and expertise,
SERAJKIES!lNTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 2
\~
. Timeliness and Budget Issues: We work hard to meet deadlines and budget. Unless there is a significant
scope change, we do not request augmented budgets. While project schedules inevitably fluctuate, we go
the extra mile to try to meet critical client deadlines.
. Location and Experience Issues: SERA, Intermountain, and Corona are all located in Colorado, althought
not Pitkin County. However, our location makes trips to Pitkin County easy, and we plan multiple trips
throughout the project. SERA is a 15 year old firm, and both Ms. Kies and Dr. Skumatz have each been in
the field for more than 25 years. We have worked successfully with clients across the nation and
Internationally. The fact that the bulk of the team is located within a relatively short drive from Pitkin County
should be an asset to the project. However, we also note that even with local clients (merely blocks away),
our most frequent methods of communication are phone and email. We will make sure the project
progresses efficiently and cost-effectively. Two of the firms proposed are woman-owned, and this project
represents our core business area.
1.4 Past Projects and References
References for similar projects for the prime contractor and each subcontractor are provided below. In each case,
the personnel attached to the firm in this proposal are relevant for the reference. We do not provide 'corporate
quais" that reflect work by other offices or by other staff not proposed for primary pieces of the work.
Table: References
Project Name Reference: Company, Project Description
Name. Contact Phone
Deveiopment of Programs John Armstrong, Fort Project involved reviewing current program status and performance,
to Reach 50% Diversion - Collins Department of materials remaining in the waste stream, modeling program altematives
City of Fort Collins Environment, Phone: to read1 City's diversion goal, gather input from stakeholders and citizens
970/416-2230; email: and conduct public process. and develop final program recommendations
For SERA, Kies, jarmstrong@fcgov.com SERA and Kies conducted the technical work. Corona conducted
Intermountain and Corona surveys of more than 380 households; SERA conducted surveys of
commercial entities. Intermountain conducted the Dublic process.
Development of Programs and Mr. Jack DeBell, UC- Developed Diversion potential assessment model including tonnage
Model to Reach Diversion Boulder -3031492-8307, forecasts by building type, incentives, program design. costs and
Goals debell@soolcolorado.edu extensive graphing and analysis modules.
For SERA
Model for program options / Ms. Polagaya Fine, Diversion Potential Assessment model, including tonnage forecasts,
incentives to reach goals; Snohomish County Solid costs, program design module, transfer station siting moduie, and other
Transfer station siting and Waste Division -Phone: elements. Used for program and facility planning.,
incentives. 425/388-6492 (SERA)
For SERA
Program planning and Ms. Rory Bakke, Alameda Kies has conducted numerous projects including source reduction
development / N~merous County StopWaste- library, development of incentives for eco-parks, interviews with
assignments 510/614-1699, stakeholders for many projects, program design, and other initiatives.
rbakkel1ilstoDwaste.oro SERA conducted work to estimate potential for commercial source
For Kies Strateoies reduction initiatives.
Transfer station operations, Mr. Steve Apotheker, Mr. SERA conducted detailed anaiysis of transfer station operations,
comparisons, efficiencies. Quinn, Portland Metro- comparisons, efficiencies, benchmarking, and other work. Kies has
Kies has also conducted 503/797-1698. also conducted extensive work for Portland Metro
extensive work for Portland
Metro. (SERA and KIESl
Relevant Project Descriptions for the Team
SERA:
. Fort Collins. Diversion Potential Study - Programs to Reach 50%: In 2005, SERA and the same Team
SERAlKIESIINTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SoUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY
3
\~
proposed on this project conducted a project for the City of Fort Collins to identity program options that couid enable
the City to reach its Council-adopted 50% diversion goal. SERA used data from its in-house database of programs
around the nation to estimate the program performance and cost for different programs, and its list of residential,
business, hauler, C&D, and other programs to work with the client to select candidate program options. The project
included 1) assessment of measurement options and selection of a preferred tracking approach; 2) assessment of
current program performance, 3) technical program potential work and options development, and construction of a
diversion potential analysis model, 4) extensive interaction with a stakeholder group, and 5) a significant public
involvement process. The project was based on a concept of diversifying the sectors for program elements to
maximize the success potential; that is, programs affecting commerciai businesses, haulers, households, builders,
and a variety of other actors were to be included in the final package. To provide input and potentially buy-in to the
project and its results, a Blue Ribbon panel of regional solid waste; diversion-related businesses and stakeholders
was assembied. The consultants conducted residential and commercial surveys regarding satisfaction, behaviors,
preferences, willingness to pay, and attitudinal; demographic components, and this information was used to assess
the potential for various program options being considered. A public meeting was held to gauge public reaction to
three alternative program sets. At the conclusion of the technical analysis, Ms. Gordon was responsible for using
the technical results and recommendations and overlaying political considerations to craft the most appropriate set
of programs for the City, and presenting the results to the City Council.
. Alameda County Commercial Waste Prevention (WP) Program Research and "Calculator": This 1994
project was designed to provide information for Alameda County to use to 1) estimate the (tonnage diversion)
potential for a waste prevention program in Alameda County, and 2) idenmy the most suitable interventions and
target business sectors. SERA conducted a detailed literature study to find information on commercial waste
prevention programs elsewhere, and gather any quantitative results available. SERA combined this data with
information from commercial surveys of Alameda County businesses (conducted by SERA) and census data to
create a scenario analysis model and Waste Prevention "calculator" that could be used to estimate the likely
impacts associated with program designs based on WP strategies and business types. The report also specified
measurement methods for on-going data improvement and program evaluation efforts.
. Evaluation of Single Stream Recycling: In 2004, SERA conducted a detailed study of the impacts of single
stream recycling on tonnage and costs at three points in the value stream: 1) household collection, 2) MRFs and
material sales, and 3) paper mills. SERA gathered data from more than 100 single stream and dual stream
communities, and used statistical methods to examine differences in performance between the two program types.
The analysis method for both tonnages and costs controlled for non-single stream differences between the
communities, including demographics, program design, materials, and other factors to identity the impacts
associated with the single stream features. The analysis of MRFs gathered data from more than 60 facilities, and
examined the throughput, prohibitives, and costs to examine the net differences between single and dual stream
performance. The mills impact was analyzed by the prime contractor, Jakke Poyry.
. Evaluation of California's AB939 Legislation: SERA gathered data from a statisticai sample of y,. of the
communities in the State, and conducted extensive statistical analysis to assess the diversion impacts attributable
to the legislation, as well as the cost implications of the interventions. The work estimated the tonnage diversion
from recycling and yard waste programs implemented to comply with AB939. The analysis examined the role of
demographics, program design, and incentive; fiscal factors In program performance between communities. SERA
also assessed the cost implications, and developed a "cost curve". estimating the costs associated with reaching
25%, 30%, and other diversion levels to and above 50%. The study examined the role of
Kies Strategies
. See Fort Collins Project above.
. Development of a Site Master Plan, Bend, Oregon - Participated in the development of a master plan for
the Knott Landfill and in the design of a new recycling center. Provided an evaluation of recyclables
SERAlKIESIINTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL.
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 4
,S
marketing arrangements and their effectiveness. Coordinated with a partnering process to involve all
affected parties in a long-term decision-making process. Directed the development of an evaluation of
previous waste flows and material diversion in order to project the material voiumes and types that would be
delivered to the faCility over the next 25 years. This assessment of material-specific facility capacity needs
and traffic volumes was critical to facility design. Client: Deschutes County
. Development of an Integrated Waste Management Transfer and Recycling System, County of Hawaii,
Hawaii - Directed a project focused on two assignments: performing a feasibility analysis for collecting
residential refuse and recyclables at curbside in three developed sections of the County (Hilo, Waimea, and
Kailua-Kona), and evaluating existing transfer station arrangements and defining alternative transfer station
configurations to provide more comprehensive, systematic disposal, and diversion opportunities to residents
and businesses. Client: County of Hawaii
Intermountain
. Solid Waste Reduction 5.Year Strategic Plan, City of Fort Collins (2005.2006): Partnering with Skumatz
Economic Research Associates, InterMountain directed stakeholder and community relations activities to
support the city's effort to increase recycling and reduce the waste going to local landfills. The firm designed a
successful public outreach process to engage Fort Coliins residents, elected officials and business and industry
leaders in the review, refinement and selection of viable recycling and other waste diversion strategies.
. Lowry Landfill Superfund Site (2003.Present): InterMountain directs community outreach, media relations and
intergovernmental and reguiatory coordination to support remediation efforts at the 480-acre Superfund site in
Arapahoe County operated by the City & County of Denver.
Corona
. Fort Collins: Corona conducted the survey work for solid waste projects in Fort Collins including sample
deveiopment, fielding, and analysis.
. Superior, CO: Corona recently successfully completed a survey for Superior on Parks and Recreationai
facilities.
. Other projects: Detailed survey research in conservation and diversion, activities, baselines, attitudes,
program evaluation / tracking I impact I design issues for City of Fort Collins, the California IOUs (utilities),
numerous energy agencies, Rocky Mountain Housing Development Corporation, Colorado Department of
Transportation, Town of Superior Colorado, Tulsa County Community Health Department, Colorado
Department of Public Health and Education, Colorado Division of Wildl~e, Denver Public Schools, National
Coalition against Domestic Violence, and projects in 30 states across the US.
SERAlKIESIINTERMOUNTAJN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 5
\~
2. UNDERSTANDING AND TASKS / APPROACH FOR THE PROJECT
We plan to conduct the work in 6 tasks:
o Task 1: Kickoff I planning
o Task 2: Analysis of Status Quo I Gap Analysis I Performance
o Task 3: Analysis / Design of Options
o Task 4: Public Process
o Task 5: Implementation and Delivery of Model
o Task 6: Project Management Reporting
o Task 7 (optional): Household and/or Commercial Survey
These tasks are described below. Each task describes the objective of the task, foilowed by the approach, and then
a table of activities and deliverables.
Task 1: Kickoff
The kickoff meeting is attended by staff from all tasks. We focus on reviewing the work scope, revising / reviewing
priorities and schedule, identifY data sources and other background information. Key will be identifYing existing
programs. data, and costs in support of Tasks ] and 2. For Task 3. we will need to review the public process needs,
groups to be included, and preferred interaction methods. For Task 6 (optional survey), we will need to address
survey lists, targets, and discuss survey topics, among other issues. We will need to decide on optional tasks and
methods. These discussions will provide valuable input for all tasks.
The project initiation meeting wiil be scheduied in early October or another mutuaily agreed date at the County's
offices (or other designated location). In advance of the meeting, the SERA Team ("team") wiil provide an agenda for
review, the key project consultants (and contact info), and a preliminary data request to get discussions roiling.
Several key topics wiil comprise the meeting agenda:
o The attendees will discuss the project's objectives, deliverables, and timeline, as well as the audience for the
project deliverables.
o The County will discuss the current status of the programs, participation, implementation, and especially data
and records available.
o Discussion of the slakeholder group, and whether the County sees a need for an auxiliary group made up of
haulers, facility owners, and perhaps commercial business leaders that may provide input on broader programs
and options. We believe this kind of group can be useful to a project of this nature.
o Information useful for the public input process.
o Decisions on the optional task.
o Establish timeline for bi-weekiy updates via email, and periodic in-person updates.
In addition, we will discuss the County's preferred method for communication with the team, and develop a regular
schedule for phone and email updates on project progress. We wili aiso discuss preferred working relationship with
the stakeholder group.
Shortly after the meeting, the SERA Team will prepare a memo summarizing the outcome and decisions of the
meeting and incorporate a speCific data request. in addition, the list of contact information for various project staff will
be updated with the County staff names as appropriate.
Soecific activities and deliverables are itemized below.
Task 1 Kickoff Activities Deliverables
0 Schedule, prepare agenda 0 Agenda with list of Team's key personnel for the study
0 Discussion of project, goals, approach, data, and other . Memorandum documenting results of the project initiation meeting
topics.
0 Preoare summarY memo and revise scooe if necessarY
SERAlKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY
6
~
Task 2: Status Quo and Gap Analysis I Performance Assessment
The first step will be for the Team to understand the current system in Pitkin County - communities, generation,
waste streams, programs, haulers, facilities, policies, and so on. We will review the current system and conduct a
"gap" analysis to identify existing shortfalls in opportunities for recycling and reduction. This work will be conducted
through a thorough review of the available programs and services for the County's main customer groups I sectors.
Based on the gap analysis, we will then be able to identify a set of cost-effective strategies - not just programs - that
will help the County continue progress toward ~s diversion goals.
Gap Analysis and Strategies List
SERA and Kies Strategies will work with the County to review the current programs and services available to single
family residential,1 mUlmamily, business, and institutional groups in town. After the internal service review, we will
conduct some follow-up as necessary, by contacting a sample of businesses, haulers, facility owners, HOAs, and
others to better understand the system, If appropriate, we can schedule one of the meetings with the Solid waste
Advisory Board to gather input for this analysis.
This will provide information to support a "gap" analysis. We will construct a matrix that highlights opportunities and
omissions for kev aenerators of waste. it will be similar to the followina in structure.
S4llltl!r' .ll! _~"of. ' ~'" ',lRllllllM , ,.....and
,", P
" ' " .aIIQUft)' .....~ ...
. .1,*" ".'. '
-
Sinale familv
Multifamilv
Business
Institutional (schools,
oovemment, other)
CaD
Develoners I owners
Other'
We will review services available (and underserved populations), and review order of magnitude costs for the current
system. In addition, we will examine the tonnage diversion from the existing system to provide a summary of the
status quo and gaps available for the analysis and design tasks,
Task 2 Status Quo Activities Dellverables
. Gather and analyze data from the County and communities, records, and interviews . Memorandum summarizing gap
to understand the current solid waste system and facilities in the County analysis
. Identify the key generators and actors, and conduct a gap analysis, noting where . Revised memo incorporating County
diversion services are and are not available. comments
. Meet with County and possibly Advisory Committee
. Prepare gap analysis and review with County.
. Revise oar discussions with the County
Task 3: Analysis I Design
The gap analysis provides the basis for the next step. It provides key information on current availability and
1 We will specifically look at options for low income customers as well- sometimes programs are
available but are too expensive for practical participation by disadvantaged households.
, We will identify other actors as appropriate. See discussion below on diversifying approaches.
SERAlKIES~NTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE Souo WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PIT~N COUNTY 7
4:
(practical) use of services. We will then review our list of 120 options to identity those with "potential" for the County.
This list is derived from interviews with successful programs around the US, Canada, and internationally, and is
continually updated. However, we will specifically augment this list with networking / updating interviews with at least
8 industry leaders, including, but not limited to Steve Apotheker, Jerry Powell, County of San Jose, County of San
Francisco, Seattle, Ecocycle, and several others.
We believe our list is important to this project. It saves the County considerable time and money in generating this
list of strategies. It is comprehensive, in that it includes not just "programs", but creative incentives, regulatory
options, and other strategies that can encourage and provide an improved climate for diversion. Finally, we believe
our approach goes beyond traditional approaches to encouraging recyciing. We believe that diversifying the
responsibility for recycling to multiple agents or actors is critical to getting cooperation. Cooperation is improved if
one actor does not feel like they are carrying a disproportionate share of the responsibility (and cost / hassle /
burden) for recycling. By designing to provide some of the responsibility to a number of entities, the County is
provided several advantages:
. Greater chance of achieving goals - and lower risk should an unfavorable court ruling or a buyout affect
one key actor or set of actors.
. Greater leveraging of recycling / program impacts
. Continuing progress and evolution in several sectors
. Diversification in case a program is not as successful as hoped
. Greater cooperation if responsibility is shared - balance and "buy-in"
. Greater efficiencies and iower "social cost" of achieving the recycling / diversion goals.3
We will examine and consider for Pitkin County a variety of programs, incentives, and options for increasing diversion
from actors including at least the following:
. Builders and developers, to avoid iost opportunities in the near and longer term;
. Commercial and multifamily generators, through improved rates, lower barriers, better access, and
other strategies;
. Residential generators, through efficiencies, conveniences, and incentives;
. Haulers, to help provide better access to programs, better incentives and cost-effectiveness, help ievel
playing fields, and help align their goais to the County's;
. Facilities, to provide an environment for improved infrastructure and focus on diversion;
. Recycling businesses, to reduce barriers and close the loop, and
. County/county through work on codes and becoming leaders in walking the talk.
After identifying a variety of potentially feasible options ("raw subset"), we will discuss these in a meeting with the
County and steering / advisory committee(s) so that a better sense of unknown barriers or issues can be identified up
front. We will discuss the criteria to be used to "select down' the list - including filling service gaps, diversification,
barriers issues, target materials, "hot buttons", County responsibilities, and others that will be discussed in the kickoff
meeting and in association with this task and meeting. After this feedback, we will reduce the list to the subset to be
further analyzed through the modeling work described below.
Program Options Development I Modeling
We will modify SERA's solid waste program analysis spreadsheet model to fit the County. The Excel model4
provides separate sheets for the following computations:
3 As a simple example, trying to reach 50% recycling from only the residential seclorwould require 100%
recycling of the 50% of MSW generated by residents, which would be much more expensive (and high
risk) than getting some from each of several actors.
4 The City will receive a no-cost license for City staff use of the model in the future.
SERNKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 8
\1\
. Forecasts of tonnage by sector for 20 years - sectors include SF residential, multifamily, commercial,
institutional, and self-haul. 5 Forecasts of diversion for current programs are also included on this sheet.
All these forecasts must be tailored / re-estimated based on Pitkin County data.6
. Waste composition by sector - based on County data, or using default data from other locations
. Program planning moduie - allowing the user to design up to 25 programs or incentives. For each
program, the user selects the sector and materiais affected, the timing of implementation (and the
speed to full-scale), the "capture" of the materials, and cost information. SERA will use information
from tts field data on hundreds of programs nationwide to input reasonable and defensible impact and
cost data into the program planning moduie to develop "packages".
. Scenario settings page - which allows the user to select "in or out" specific programs, select high or low
economic conditions, modify costs, modify growth assumptions, and many other factors underlying the
modeling work. We will meet with the County to assure that the model incorporates key "settings" that
the County requires for its current and future modeling efforts.
. Summary page reporting out tonnages disposed by sector, disposal materiai, and diversion levels for
current and "new" programs, costs, and budget needs. Graphical format is also provided for key
indicators.
We will work with the County to identify any and all data needed for the forecasting part of the work. That includes
rates / prices / tip fees, tonnages, and program information, among other data. We will then use the model to "build"
realistic versions of the subset of program options selected for detailed analysis. We will construct "packages' that
will move the County toward its diversion goal. The robustness of these packages and programs to different
economic assumptions and scenarios will be tested in developing a Iimrted set of "packages" for consideration by the
County and the public invoivement process. . We will expect to design optimal packages based on assessment of
criteria decided by the County and through exploratory work on the public involvement process. We assume these
criteria will include: high diversion, limited rate shock to sensitive customer groups, low cost; diversifying
responsibility/sectors; avoiding lost opportunities; success in other jurisdictions, addressing target / high priority
materials; and other factors.
We will discuss the resuits with the County and steering committee, and seiect a manageable number of options for
consideration for the public process. SERA will prepare simplified graphics and tables and other supporting materials
suitable for the public process and conduct additional' analyses needed to respond to questions or comments from
the pUblic and stakeholders. We will be available to present options, and answer questions as necessary / desired at
meetings, and will prepare appropriate portions of the final report in support of our methodology / approach and
results.
Enhanced Cost Analysis: We will model up to 40 semi-finalist programs - including tonnages, participations, and
costs. Our approach provides a clear and Important enhancement over much work in the field: we provide estimates
not only of the cost to the County, but also the estimated costs borne by the generators for the option. In this manner,
the County can get a clearer picture of the full costs of options. We will present the figures in terms of Cost per ton,
and cost per percentage point of diversion for the county, residential generators and commercial generators. We
assume any hauler costs are passed through to their customers, so no separate accounting of their costs are
modeled.
We will walk through the model with the County in order to make sure the model can address the current and near-
term (at least) needs and scenario options the County staff may need to model now and after the conclusion of the
project. The final documentation and training is provided in Task 5.
5 For some clients, C&D has been measured separately.
6 Atthough where time series data are not sufficient to support new modeling, we can use default
equations from other communities.
7 A "reasonable" amount of follow-up analyses(!)
SERAlKJEsJlNTERMOUN7A1N PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SoUO WASTE MASTER PlAN FOR PlmN COUNTY 9
}\)
The model will identify high potentiai programs and strategies. These will then be reviewed with the County and
assessed on a number of criteria:
. Cost to city - up-front and on-9oing, and budget cycie issues
. Cost to generators, and rate shock considerations
. Tonnage' diversion
. Diversity of sectors it encompasses
. Equity issues
. High quality service
Semifinalist to Finalist with Implementation Options
.
Consistency with policy
Ease of implementation
County has authority
Political considerations
Other
.
.
.
.
We will gather information from the County on the relative importance of these and other criteria in selecting among
options. We will assess the semi-finalist programs on these criteria and discuss the results with the County. Then
we will subject these finalists to another, more detailed review and modeling - and bring In new elements:
. More enhanced designing of the program - and more detailed costs;
. Implementation issues' plan
. Facilities' siting issues, and other information.
From this information we will assess the options and develop recommended strategies for discussion with the County
and the Advisory Board, and provide a draft implementation plan including timeline, steps, and responsibilities.
Task 3 Anal is I Des! n Activities
. Develop subset of program strategies -- for review with City and finalize list for
detailed analysis
. Data request for model and forecasting work
. Refine model and conduct scenario analysis
. Walk through model with County staff for comment' enhancements
. Meeting with stakeholder' advisory groups for input' comment
. identify semifinalist options for detailed review. costing. implementation' design
. Meeting with County and stakeholder' advisory groups for input I comment
. Develop "packages" of programs - review with County and finalize subset for
ublic racess - resentation at ublic rocess
Task 4: Public Process
Deliverables
. Memorandum summarizing
results of program modeling
. Revised memo incorporating
County comments
A broad range of stakeholders will have a vested interest in the crafting and implementation of a new solid waste plan
for Pitkin County. These might include waste hauiers and recyclers, transportation and environmental interests, the
business community and the general public. It will be critical for long-term success to keep these and other
constituencies informed about every stage of the process and to provide continual opportunities for them to offer
input and shape the ultimate policies that are selected. The multifaceted stakehoider invoivement approach
proposed here has been successfully "road tested" in a variety of circumstances and for a variety of government and
private sector clients around Colorado - we are confident it will help the County achieve its goals as well.
Though details will be refined and adjusted fOllowing kick-off meetings with the County and other project team
members and as elements of the master plan evolve, what follows are proposed general elements of the stakehoider
involvement program:
Community Forums
Our team envisions hosting one or more community forums - "on a schedule to be determ'lned," as directed by the
Request for Proposal - that combine the best elements of an academic lecture, town hall meeting, art exhibit and
coffeehouse conversation. The centerpiece of each open house will involve a presentation by project team experts
that fosters dynamic interaction with citizens and other attending stakeholders. These dialogues will be augmented
SERNKIES'INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PlmN COUNTY 10
~
by informative visual displays, small discussion tables and communication tools that allow meeting participants to
provide verbal and written comment on the master plan content being presented.
Our team will consult with the County and manage all meeting logistics, including:
o Venue selection
o Furniture and equipment selection and set-up
o IT/AV needs
o Flip charts, sign-in sheets, comment cards
o Refreshments
o Meeting promotion
o Earned media
o Paid media
o Online notification
o Invitations
o Other
Stakeholder MeetingsIPresentations
Though all stakeholder groups will be encouraged to participate in the community forums described above, we also
recommend, budget permitting, a more individualized, "high touch" approach that engages certain groups most
critical to the project's completion, such as trash haulers and recycling industry representatives, as well as
environmental advocates. We recommend meeting with these constituencies early in the project, prior to the initial
community forum, to inform them of the project's intentions and secure their buy-in to the process. Similar meetings
can be held throughout the process as necessary with organizations such as chambers of commerce, which can
provide valuable insight into the shared concerns of local businesses, or homeowner association leaders, who can
offer unique perspective on the concerns of large groups of residents.
Media Relations
Ensuring fair and thorough local media coverage of this project will aiso be critical to successfully keeping the pUblic
and other stakeholders informed and engaged in the process. Our team has outstanding experience coordinating
and preparing clients for background meetings with editors and reporters that help lay the foundation for productive
working relationships with the media. We also recommend providing a steady stream of information to Iocai media-
both print and broadcast - as the project progresses. Earned media tactics that might be incorporated include news
releases, media alerts and guest editorials in local newspapers by project managers.
Proiect Website
A crucial element of any public involvement program today is utilizing the Internet for two-way communications
between the project team and stakeholders. We have managed a number of such assignments in which a project
website proved a critical tool for sharing the most thorough background information and most up-to-date
developments. A project website can also serve as a virtual participation tool that allows a great number ot
individuais to comment or ask questions about the project outside of public meetings or other forums that require a
physical presence. In short, a project website might be used to:
o Post background information on the project and contact information for the project team
o Solicit comments and questions from the public
o Post announcements of community forums to encourage attendance
o Post presentations and displays from the forums for those unable to attend in person
o Post any related news coverage of the project
o Post the written report that serves as the final project deliverable
Rather than create a new website for this project, we propose building a project page on the existing County website.
We will work with the County to determine the budget and other logistics required to create and maintain such a
page.
SERNKIESIINTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SoUD WASTE MASTER PlAN FOR PIT~N COUNTY 11
~'}
Feedback from the Public Process:
The public meetings will be used to provide feedback on the initial proposed set of programs developed from Task 3.
Presentations and "stations" will be available at the meeting - with stations for each "package" (we estimate
presenting three varied packages for citizen feedback). We will prepare posters and/or easels summarizing the
options, as well as handouts for attendee review. In addition, we will prepare comment cards for feedback on
options, costs, and "willingness to pay" for options. We will work closely with the County on this process. This
approach worked very successfully for the City of Fort Collins. A sample of the materiais handed out is shown below
as an example.
Figure 1: Example of Public Meeting Handouts from Fort Collins
_.u~~
14%_; 53,300....
Co$l$:_ ,$1__
....
....p,..
ptp2 .. ..
0/ ~ III 1.0
0/ III to
0/ III Mei:I
1.0 ~
0/ fti VI. 1.0
, 1.0 III 1.0
0/ VI. . III
0/ ~ III Mod
0/ 111. Mod 111.
1OqIO"'1IIlll-_
'" ~
.~
.~
.~
.-
-
Task 4 Public Process Activities I Deliverables
. Discuss public process options with County, and finalize list of outreach . Draft agendas, text of outreach
methods, and meetings I interventions that wiii be held materials, website and presentation
. Organize with County staff, as appropriate materials for review by County
. Advertise public meeting(s) . Finalized versions incorporating
. Develop website County comments.
. Work with other team members to prepare appropriate, simple materials for . Memo summarizing efforts and
the public meetings. outcomes
. Provide draft materials (presentations, handouts, easels, etc.) for review by . Revised memo per County comment
County
. Update County on progress.
. Undertake other efforts as needed.
Task 5: Implementation
Our general approach to development of the final product - a finai Comprehensive Solid Waste Master Plan for the
County - is to provide the product in several stages.
We find the best method of preparing a report is to first provide the information as presentations or "walk throughs" .
We beiieve the first waik through should be with the Pitkin County Project Manager. Certainly, results will have been
SERAlKIESIINTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLlO WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 12
I},-">J
presented in draft task memos; however, this may be the first chance for some staff to review the overall results and
to review the results across tasks. This provides the client with a "heads-up" of key results, allows feedback on "hot
button' terminology, and provides a chance for discussion and input prior to the preparation of the final report. This
allows adjustment of the outline. in case it is determined not to be the best organization, and allows the County a
chance to point out final questions or issues I analyses in advance of the preparation of the final Solid Waste Master
Plan. The SERA team will prepare a PowerPoint@ presentation for waik-through with the County. If the discussion
identifies additional questions for investigation, we will conduct that work and respond to the County.
The draft report can be delivered rapidly after the County presentation, and fewer revisions will likely be needed
using this presentation I review approach. After the revised draft report is prepared, the SERA team will then
present the PowerPoint@ slides to the Advisory Board in conjunction with their review of the draft report. We will
discuss the results with the Advisory Board, and take comments. Based on input and comment, we will address
comments as appropriate, and prepare the revised Plan and recommendations to the County. The report will be
submitted to the Project Manager for coordination of internal and external review and comment, including referral to
the Board of County Commissioners with the Advisory Board's recommendations.
The report will include:
. Executive summary emphasizing major findings, implications, and recommendations. This is designed to be readable by
lay audiences, and should be separable I stand-aione in nature to allow wide distribution.
. Background or introduction, including discussion of the results of the analyses
. Framework and Methodoiogy, providing a description of the research approach, primary and secondary data collection
methods, context, relation to previous research, and description of the method / models I approach used for computing the
results, information on survey dispos~ion, sample, and instrument development. Some information may go to the Appendix
. Results of the status quo and gap analysis, as well as the recommended package of programs and system modifications.
. Implementation Plan, denoting steps for implementation, who is responsible, schedule, and costs. This will be presented in
both verbal form and in tables for ease of reference.
. Summary, Implications, and Recommendations. providing a discussion of the major results I issues I implications I
recommendations arising from the research. The recommendations should not only address direct recommendations from
the study, but also identify areas for further research or other work indicated as follow-up, and information on how the
results may be used in future research, planning.
. We also suggest possibly incorporating a monitoring and evaluation component into the Plan - with decision points on
additional measures to implement should performance not be as expected..
. Appendix, documenting the data, sources, survey instruments, references, and other documentation related to the conduct
of the project.
The Final Report and the presentation will be submitted in hard copy and electronic format. Electronic copies of all
raw and anaiyzed data will also be prOVide!! to the State. We will also provide training on the model for County solid
waste staff 50 they may use the modei in future program planning and refinements.
Task 5 ImDlementatlon I Repoff Activities Dellverables
. Prepare walk-though presentation; deliver to the County . Presentation slides
. Discuss presentation; conduct additional analyses as needed: revise outiine . Draft report
based on walk-through if necessary . Final report
. Prepare draft report from presentation and comments I discussion . Revised presentation slides
. Present to Advisory committee . Electronic copies of reports and data
. Prepare final report incorporating edits. . Documentation of the electronic
. Trainina on the model model
Task 6: Progress Reporting
This reporting task is focused on periodic project management reporting with the County. We propose a monthiy
written progress report in association with the invoice, and regularly scheduled phone progress meetings every other
week with the project manager. The monthly written reports will include progress, planned activities next period,
schedule issues and data or information issues holding progress, problems encountered and possible solutions, and
important deviations from budget or schedule.
SERNKJES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PlmN COUNTY 13
~~
Task 7 Proaress Reaortino ActivRies Deliverables and Schedule
. Monthly written progress reports with invoices . Monthly written progress updates throughout
. Every other week phone discussions or email contact to project
uodate on Qroaress
Task 7 (optional): Optional Surveys - Large Scale Household Survey and Small Scale
Business Survey
Although the public input process provides feedback on options, the most useful and reliable feedback on program
options - and potential willingness to pay for new / revised programs - is obtained by conducting a statistical survey.
By their nature, public meetings tend to be attended by those with strong opinions; statistical surveys provide
representative feedback from all residents. We are proposing this as an optional task.
To conduct Task 7 - the public opinion survey, we propose a telephone survey of 400 randomiy selected Pitkin
County residents (Corona also presents an option for 800 completed surveys, if the County desires). The proposed
survey length is 10 minutes.
As seen earlier in this proposal, Corona Research has extensive experience conducting telephone surveys along
with other types of surveys as part of the primary research process. In this section, Corona Research highlights the
following related to its knowledge of the telephone surveying process and its project approach:
o Advantages of a telephone survey;
o Project work plan and schedule; and
o Rule of thumb considerations for sample size.
Advantages of a telephone survey
Whlie Corona Research has experience in conducting and analyzing data from various types of surveys, including
telephone, mail, door to door, Interactive Voice Response (IVR), intercept, internet, and e-mail surveys, Corona
Research recommends that the County use of a telephone survey for this project. A few advantages of conducting a
telephone survey for this type of project Include:
Specific strengths of telephone surveys
o Telephone surveys provide more random and accurate reSl.llts because the sample is less
self-selective. The percentage of those contacted who respond is generally higher than for
other types of surveys, thus minimizing response bias.
o Telephone surveys have the capability to potentially reach all households with a telephone in
Pitkin County, including those with unlisted numbers. The proportion of the population with no
opportunity to be sampled is smaller than tor any other type of survey other than possibly door
to door.
o A telephone survey can be completed more Quickly than other type of survey.
o While the telephone survey script will be followed closely, the opportunity exists tor phone
interviewers to explain Questions or terms if respondents don't understand.
o Telephone surveys offer the ability to have sophisticated "skip patterns" to target certain
opinionslbehaviors.
o Telephone surveys allow more detailed input of open-ended Questions.
Estimated average completion time. An effective telephone survey is generally limited to a maximum of about 15
minutes. The longer a telephone survey continues, the more people wili "drop out" and not fully answer all the
Questions. For the survey in this study, when considering the survey conten\, Corona expects respondents to
complete the survey in about 10 minutes. Therefore, the survey budget reflects that length.
Work Plan
Upon reviewing the RFP and subsequent communications related to the public opinion survey in this project, Corona
SERNKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 14
0-t
Research envisions seven specific tasks to successfully complete the survey:
1. Initial Meeting;
2. Design Survey Instrument;
3. Purchase a Calling Sample;
4. Execute the Survey;
5. Weight the Survey Data;
6. Perform Data Analysis; and
7. Prepare Final Report.
All of the above steps will be performed by Corona Research in partnership with SERA and Intermountain and under
the direction of the County of Pitkin County project manager. Wherever necessary in the survey process, such as in
survey design task, the SERA-Intermountain-Corona team will work collaboratively with County officials to ensure the
highest quality finished product.
Public opinion survey schedule
In terms of schedule, Corona Research is able to complete all tasks related to the survey in this project within six
weeks of initiating the Task 7 process. This aggressive timeframe assumes expeditious review and feedback by
County officials in tasks such as survey design and draft report review. Corona is able to further condense the
timeline to meet clients needs, if necessary. A task-by-task project schedule through the preparation of the final
report is as shown below:
Overall, Corona Research has a solid history of meeting all project deadlines that it proposes and is very confident in
its ability to meet the following proposed scheduie.
Step 1. Initial meeting. Our project team's standard practice is to meet with the client prior to initiating work, to
ensure agreement on the goais and work pian of the research. Kevin Raines of Corona Research will join Lisa
Skumatz and Drew Kramer on the project team in meetings with the Pitkin County project manager. Kevin will be
prepared to join meetings either in-person or by teleconference to address any survey-related issues, especially as
these relate to the other tasks 1-3 that are conducted in this project.
Initial meetings on the public opinion survey may cover the following issues.
o Review and finalize each step of the project methodology, to ensure that the project team and
the County's project manager are in agreement on our approach.
o Define a reporting and contact protocol.
o Confirm the project's schedule for completion, and the intermediate milestones necessary to
meet that schedule.
o Agree on the format and structure of reporting to the client.
Step 2. Design the survey instrument. After step 1 above, SERA will lead the survey design process. As
requested in the RFP for this project, Corona proposes the following activities as part of the survey design process.
o Review findings from other tasks in the project including the report that is generated in Task 3,
which wili summarize identification of potentiai strategies to increase waste diversion as well
as results of public involvement.
o Develop a survey instrument to provide feedback on behaviors, a set of draft options, and
willingness to pay information useful to developing finai strategies for the County
o Engage collaborativeiy with County staff to finalize survey instrument.
Based on all input gathered in the design process, SERA will deveiop a draft of the survey questionnaire, subject to
review and approval of officials at the County. it wili be the Team's goal to develop questions that address overall
research needs, and are clear and unbiased in structure. Upon approval, Corona will prepare and program a final
survey instrument, Which is expected to be approximately 10 minutes in length when taken by telephone.
Step 3. Purchase a calling sample. In this project, Corona Research recommends the use of an Countywide
Random Digit Dial (RDD) list sample. With a few specific exceptions, Corona routinely purchases Countywide RDD
SERAlKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SoUO WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 15
}~
lists from a commercial list broker for surveys of municipal residents. The required size of the calling list depends on
the desired amount of responses. These ROD lists provide a more representative sample of the population than a
listed sample of househoids (i.e., "the phone bool<'). The only instances where our team would suggest a listed
sample would be surveys with very specific target populations where a true ROD survey would be inordinately costly.
In those instances, Corona informs the client of the cost difference and the quality difference and help them decide
their best option. One complexity associated with Pitkin County is that there is a significant seasonal component.
We propose a simple sampling design, reaching a random set of homes that respond; samples that would provide
separate results for seasonal and non-seasonal residents can be constructed, but wili be more expensive to conduct.
Step 4. Execute the survey. Corona's speCialty is in survey design, analysis and reporting. For some types of
surveys, such as mail surveys, Corona implements the survey in-house. For other types of surveys, such as
telephone surveys, Corona works with a stable of subcontractors who actually conduct the field research. For this
project, Corona will use a subcontractor that it has worked with extensively in the past on public opinion surveys,
Step 5. Weight the survey data. The raw results of a public telephone survey could be inherentiy biased, because
survey participants tend to be older and more female than the general population. Corona will compare the
demographics of the responding population against those of the study population, and Corona will weight individual
responses to ensure that the total responses reflect the entire Pitkin County population in key demographic terms.
The extent of the weighting process depends on the number of demographic questions that are included in the
survey, such as those about age, gender, educational attainment, and race/ethnic background. The responses of
some respondents who represented traits that were underrepresented in the group of total survey participants will
therefore be weighted more heavily than the responses of people whose traits were over.represented among the
total survey participants. For this reason, the survey findings represent a more complex and accurate analysis than
would a mere tabulation of the raw data.
Step 6. Analyze the survey data. The Team is well versed in survey analysis tools, and uses those to prepare
tabulations of the data. We will examine the data for patterns and conduct follow-up analyses to confirm or refute
those observations.
As is explained further below, the precision of the data analysis in terms of statistical reliability will depend upon the
number of survey responses gathered. Given Pitkin County's approximate population, we expect the following
approximate accuracies from possible completion options:
+/- 10% at 90% confidence from about 90 completes.
+/- 5% at 90% confidence from about 270 completes, and
+/- 5% at 95% confidence from about 360 compietes.
If no further stratification or segmentation in findings is necessary, the sample designs may not need to be more
complex. If the County wishes to have the ability to separate Aspen from the County-wide results, variations in the
sample design may be appropriate and the larger sample sizes may be warranted.
Step 7. Prepare final report of findings. Corona will write a report of field research and data analysis and prepare
a reader-friendly report with concise text and "easy to read" graphics to i1iustrate our findings and conclusions of the
survey.
RULE OF THUMB CONSIDERATIONS FOR SAMPLE SIZE
The proposed cost for the public opinion survey provided as an option in this project, is directly dependent on the
number of survey responses that are collected. In choosing the correct target number of survey responses, it is
important to consider how the number of responses affects the statistical validity of findings. Below is a brief
discussion of sample numbers of surveys completed along with corresponding statistical validity. As a general rule of
thumb, we offer the following table for consideration. Margin of error rates given below are all for the 95 percent
statistical confidence level.
SERNK,ES/INTERMOUNTA,N PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 16
1).\
Completed Statistical Strength of a One- Ability to Examine Ability to Repeat
Surveys Time Survey ~ Segments Within the Survey to Examine
~ Population Changes
1 ,200 or more Very Strong (2.8 %) Very Strong Very Strong
800 to 1,100 Very Strong (3.5 - 3.1 %) Moderate Moderate
400 to 700 Strong (4.9 - 3.7 %) Weak to Moderate Weak to Moderate
250 to 300 Weak to Moderate (6.2 - 5.7%) Weak Very Weak'
100 to 200 Weak ("capture the pulse') None None'
30 Absolute Minimum None None
, - Unless changes are quite large (greater than 10 to 20 percentage points)
Optional Interviews with Sample of Businesses
Since commercial waste may account for a significant proportion of overall waste, the County may prefer to conduct
interviews with businesses in addition to surveying residents. Interviews with business representatives who are "in
the know' will assist in uncovering their opinions of, attitudes toward, and support levels for, alternative measures of
solid waste reduction that are developed as part of a Plan for reaching Increasing diversion in Pitkin County.
Findings from these interviews will be particularly helpful given that the make-up of waste and recycling streams from
various industries is different than households, and thus, It is plausible that attitudes toward increased diversion
among those in commercial settings may be different.
In this project, the Team proposes to conduct business representative interviews primarily by telephone, although in-
person interviews may be arranged whenever it is more convenient for the respondents. In-depth interviews will be
approximately 15-20 minutes long and we propose to conduct approximately 30-40 interviews. The steps to conduct
this work are similar to the description of the residential survey. This option is addressed in the budget.
SERNKIESIINTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SCUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PlmN COUNTY 1 7
rrct
3. TEAM ORGANIZATION, STAFFING PLAN, BUDGET, & T1MELlNE
3.1 Team Assigned to the Project and Roles
Dr. Skumatz will serve as project manager. She will lead on the technical work on situation analysis and program
options analysis and model building in conjunction with Ms. Gordon and Ms. Kies. Drew Kramer will lead the public
outreach work, with assistance from Ms. Gordon. Shouid surveys be selected as part of this project, Mr. Kevin
Raines will manage these assignments. In that case, survey instruments will be developed by SERA to assure that
the results feed into the options development.
Communication with the Pitkin County Project Manager can be directly with these key staff, or through one point of
contact, at the Pitkin County's preference. Project Roles for the work are outlined as follows (X indicates primary,
A=assist).
Staff Roles
Project Roles ( 'liS E
Responsibilities .g>- o~ ~ c.
ffi~ "," - C> ~
08 e '" "" 0; a.
1~1l g-:=~ a. .- "
_o..~i5 .. ,,>. '"
~Ei .a .5 l'~.Q ,g~ 0'" 8.
X Primary, A Assist >.." "'c:
c\1l~ "''''il ",,,0 .<>'" 8"~ 8!
I Review ~=> 0<>::0 0<(:;; rfo
Sl<.umatz, SERA X X X X A X
Gordon, SERA X X A X
Kies, Kies A X X
Strateaies
Gardner, SERA A
Freeman, Bement, A
SERA
Kramer, X
Intermountain
Raines, Corona X
Trained Survey X
Staff, Corona
Organizational Chart
Pitkin County
Chris Hoofnagle I Project
Manaaer ( Client
I
Skumatz f SERA
Consultant Team Manaaer
I
I I
Kies Strategies Skumatz Kramer
Kies Strategies Manager SERA Manager Intermountain Corporate Affairs
Mananer
Delyn Kies Susie Gordon Mary Brown
John Gardner, David Freeman Megan Alderton
And team of outside experts as
needed
I
I Ootional: Raines
.sERAlKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SoUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITKIN COUNTY 18
/\~
Corona Manaaer
Saunders, Trained Survey
Staff
We will manage this work from our offices in Boulder I Denver (SERA, Intermountain, and Corona), and Portland
(Kies Strategies). We envision frequent on-site visits to Pitkin County to coordinate the project, meet with the
stakeholder committee, and assess current programs and facility I program potential.
Location and Experience Issues: SERA is a 15 year old firm, and Dr. Skumatz has been in the field for more than
25 years. We have worked successfully with clients across the nation and internationally (WBE). Kies Strategies
has a strong reputation, and Ms. Kies has been in the industry 25 years (WBE). SERA, Intermountain, and Corona
are all based in Colorado, although not in Pitkin County. All the firms have conducted work across the nation.
We will make sure our location is not an obstacle to this project, and we find that even with local clients (merely
blocks away), our most frequent methods of communication are phone and emall. We will make sure the project
progresses efficiently and cost-effectively,
Biographies and resumes are included later in this proposal.
3.2 Proposed Staffing Plan and Budget
Dr. Skumatz of SERA and Ms, Delyn Kies of Kies Strategies has more than 25 years of experience in solid waste and
energy planning, evaluation, and management each. Both Kies Strategies and SERA (established in 1990) are woman-
owned businesses. SERA, located in Superior, Colorado, has 4 full time employees. We have made certain that all
staff assigned to this project have sufficient time in their schedules to complete the necessary wor\< within the proposed
schedule. Biographies of key staff are included in the attachments. Throughout the course of the project, Ms. Kies and
Skumatz will provide email (or telephone) updates on project progress, and monthly written project updates with
invoices.
Staffing Plan, Proposed, Budget, and Timeline
Skumatz, SERA 110 21,780
Gordon, SERA $105 $13,020
Gardner, SERA $85 $2,890
Freeman, SERA $75 $2,400
Kies, Kies Strat $110 5 12 34 15 $14.oaO
Kramer, leA $175 8 35 $7,525
Brown, ICA $200 2 $400
Alderton, ICA $100 35 $3,500
Raines, Corona in surve costs $0
Support $55 20 18 $2,090
Total Hours 30 55 256 132 112 48
Cost by Task $3,780 $6,040 $26,240 $15.175 $11,170 $5,280 $67,685 $2,830
$400 $400 $800
$0 $14.450
$450 $1,000 $1.450
$400 $450 $0 $1,000 $400 $0 $2,250 $14,450
,180 6,490 26.240 16,175 11,570 5.280 69,935 17,280
Budget assumptions, caveats, and Options:
SERAlKIES/INTERMOUNTAIN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SoUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PITlON COUNTY 19
:)0
Base budget assumptions: 1 public meeting, no large-scale public survey.
Cost for optional task: 90 surveys for $12,000; 270 completes for $17,000, and 360 surveys for $20,000.
Base optional task assumes 90 household surveys and 35 business surveys (at $70 per complete)
Community forums are $10,000 in fees and $500-$1000 in mateirals. Subsequent forums can be run for about
$2,500 in fees and $150-$200 in expenses.
One community meeting Is Included in the base proposal
Stakeholder meetings I presentations (not included in base proposal) are $500-$2000 each, depending on the
complexity of logistics.
Media relations - A basic media program focused on background editorial meetings up front and wrap-up
announcement publicity is abot $5000 in fees.
This is not included in the base fee.
Project website costs about $500 - $750 per month of the project. This is included in !he base project fees.
SERAlKIES/INTERMOUNTAlN PROPOSAL:
PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE SOUD WASTE MASTER PLAN FOR PlmN COUNTY 20
f)"