Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7A <br />Page 11 <br /> <br />ATTACHMENT 1 <br /> <br />"Norcal: (awarded 225 points] <br />The proposal included Environmental Enhancements such as: use"ofB40 fuel (i.e., 40% <br />biodiesel), regular carbon footprint monitoring and reporting, use of hybrid trucks for <br />route supervisors, and incorporating green building design practices and standards at its <br />facilities. <br /> <br />BEST: [awarded 190 points] <br />The company is committed to using tbe highest percentage ofbiodiesel fuel available. <br />The company will use hybrid vehicles for its route supervisors. <br /> <br />Allied: [awarded 40 points] <br />The Environmental Enhancements proposed include continuing the current practice of <br />uSing B20 fuel (i.e., 20% biodiesel) in its collection fleet. In addition, the company <br />provided an Alternative Proposal to operate CNG [Compressed Natural Gas] collection <br />trucks for its collection fleet at an additional capital cost of approximately $6 million. 4 <br /> <br />Republic: [awarded 40 points] <br />None specifically noted or called out in the proposal. ,,5 <br /> <br />SBMWA 's Due Diligence Process <br /> <br />The Grand Jury asked the SBWMA Board members who were on the Selection Committee if <br />they were aware of Norcal's previous, well-publicized history in the City of San Jose (San Jose) <br />and San Bernardino County. "SBM\VA reported that Norcal's problematic history was discussed. <br />However, many of the SBWMA Board'members mentioned they'had no'knowledge of these <br />discussions. During a Menlo Park City Council meeting, the SBWMA consultant, who was <br />tasked to verify the competitors' references, publicly testified that he phoned San Jose to confirm <br />Norcal's recommendations, but he never foUowed-up. During interviews, the Grand Jury <br />learned that the SBWMA consultant worked in a consulting firm that helped create the RFP for <br />waste management collection services in 2000 for San Jose and their subsequent RFPs after <br />Norcal's problems were revealed. This consultant and his partner were o"n the SBWMA <br />Evaluation Committee. <br /> <br />The 2004-2005 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report stated, UThat the [San Jose] <br />Mayor's June 26, 2000 recommendation of No real to the Council describes Norca}'s history and <br />serious legal problems. The history also discusses San Bernardino County's lawsuit against <br />NorcaI alleging bribery, fraud, and unjust enrichnlent. An 18-monthjail sentence for a Norcal <br />employee, who admitted taking bribes and a $6.5 million settlement payment by Norcal to San <br />Bernardino County were also discussed." The 2008-2009 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury <br />could not determine if the Selection Committee were aware of these issues or explored them or <br />other issues in any depth. Further, there is no evidence that the SBWMA did a diligent search of <br />the other proposers that might have influenced the selection. <br /> <br />4 No mention was made oran opt-in proprietary pro~ caJled Recyclebank., implemented successfully in Delaware and <br />Philadelphia and awarded by the United Nations, that would supply Recyclebank's dollars to incent household recycling; <br />http://www.huliq.comll /80048?un-program-spotlights-recycJe-bank <br />, SBWMA Collection Services RFP, Selection Committee Report: Evaluation and Scoring of Proposals, August 2t, 2008 <br /> <br />7 <br />