Skip navigation

Contract: Login Login / Search

Single Hauler Trash Service

Add topic

Single Hauler Trash Service

Avatar
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Recent News:
On April 8, 2013 council approved the ordinance establishing the Single Hauler Trash Franchise for Huber Heights.  Here is a link to the agenda item.  You can find the Resolution as an attachment as well as the contract.  The resolution will take affect 30 days from the vote. 
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Original:
The discussion for limiting the number of trash service providers has been a topic in city haul for more than a year. On Oct 26 there was a City Council Meeting of the Whole (agenda). I've been looking for the video to be posted but as of this morning it is still unavailable.

Were you there? Can you update us on what happened?

I believe that I saw in the meeting notice for the Nov 6th Administration Committee meeting (now postponed until Nov 14th), council was planning to instruct staff to send out a Request for Proposal to companies so they could bid on being the single company authorized to haul residential trash in Huber. I couldn't find that notice as I write. I will look later in the week.

I was mistaken in thinking there would be a video of this meeting. However here is a link to the full minutes on the city website. I copied and pasted the discussion portion of the minutes in this post.

8.Topics of Discussion :


Trash Hauling and Recycling Issues

9.Recommendations I Actions:


Mayor Ron Fisher convened the Committee of the Whole Meeting at 4:07PM.

Trash Hauling and Recycling Issues

Jim Borland gave an overview of the process and issues to date in the City's consideration of moving to a single trash hauler for Huber Heights. He said that this meeting had been scheduled at the request of City Council to discuss the options to include in a proposed Request For Proposal (RFP) after his presentation on the trash hauling feasibility
study to the Public Works Committee on October 17, 2012. Jim Borland said the goals for the City in considering a single trash hauler include better service, lower costs, and reduced wear and tear on the City's streets in addition to quality of life improvements.

The Committee of the Whole had a lengthy discussion on the various options to include in the RFP. Jim Borland stated that the Councilmembers had each completed an online survey of the various options which would be used to rank the options, but there was not a clear consensus on all of the options. He suggested that the City could include many of the options in the RFP to see how the options would be priced by the trash haulers and then the City Council could select the options based on the pricing. Jim Borland stated he would also look at the City doing the billing and the trash hauler doing the billing for companson purposes .

Jan Vargo said she would like to see an option available for senior citizens with smaller amounts of trash to either have reduced rates and to be able to use smaller trash bags rather than the large trash containers.
Several of the residents present at the meeting voiced concerns over the size of the large trash containers or totes.

Jim Borland said that once the draft RFP for a single trash hauler for the City was prepared , he would submit it to the City Attorney for a legal revtew.

Karen Kaleps said she would like to see the recycling priced out as options in the RFP for both weekly and bi-weekly collections. She said she also wanted to be sure that there would be no limit on the number of trash containers that could be put out for trash pickup. Karen Kaleps also inquired why the City was not considering dividing the City into zones
for the trash haulers to bid on. She also said she would like to see the
City's yard waste site be open more hours for the City 's residents .

Jim Borland replied that dividing the City into zones for the trash haulers was not practical because it would increase the costs and would not reduce the amount of trash truck traffic in the City as much .

Tyler Starline said he would like to see the issue of citizens who are on military deployment addressed also.

Jan Vargo asked Jim Borland what the timeline is for the RFP and implementing a single trash hauler for the City. Jim Borland said he would like to complete the RFP and get it approved by City Council yet in 2012. He said after the RFP is approved , it would be put out for bid.
Jim Borland said that once the bids were received, the City could accept a bid and begin the implementation of a single trash hauler in the City. He said there would have to be a transitional phase of some months to implement the new system and allow residents to terminate their
contracts with their current trash haulers, but he hoped it could be put in place by the spring of2013.

After discussion, the Committee of the Whole unanimously agreed to recommend that the City Manager finalize a RFP for a single trash hauler for the City with the range of options included and to get a legal review of the RFP by the City Attorney. The Committee of the Whole then requested that the RFP be brought back to the Public Works Committee
and the City Council for final review and approval at upcoming meetings.
Other Business

There was no other business conducted at the Committee of the Whole Meeting.

10.Adjournment

Last edit: by Thomas McMasters

Avatar
An update on the Request for Proposal will be presented at the Public Works Committee meeting Dec 4th 2012 - 4:30pm at City Hall 6131 Taylorsville Rd.

Last edit: by Tom_McMasters

Avatar
I do not use any trash services. I have a dumpster at my work which allows me to get rid of my trash for free. I only hope that Huber does not get a single hauler and then I have to pay for services thru the city.

If people want to save some money on their trash, split the costs with your next door neighbor and share a trash bin. Or you can pay the cost for an extra bin and it is still cheaper than two seperate bills.
This is what I am trying to find out right now… Do I seriously have to PAY for this service even when I DONT use it??? I talked to Republic, and they told me that according to the new law, I have to pay for the service no matter if I use it or not. That is WRONG. I get rid of my trash and recycle without them. I use free services through work, also. How can they make me pay for services I don't use??
Avatar
There will be an update on the bidding progress given at the Feb 19th Public Works committee meeting.  4:00 pm at City Hall  6131 Taylorsville Rd.
Avatar
I think mandatory trash service has to be voted on by the Citizens of Huber Heights as it is considered a tax. Voluntary trash service would not have to be voted on because it is not a tax.
Many seniors go away for extended periods of time during the winter to places like Florida. They obviously do not need trash service while they are gone.
Some people have alternate arrangements that do not cost them as much such as delivering their own trash to the Montgomery County Waste sites. If you have retired and have the time that is a good alternative especially if you are spring cleaning.
Having mandatory trash service does not fit everyone's needs. Everything will change when they close the North Facility on Webster because it will become more expensive for a trash hauler to pay for diesel fuel for the trucks. Locking a trash hauler in to a price might bankrupt them.
How do we handle foreclosed property in this proposal?
What provision is made for section 8 housing apartments where money is extremely tight?
What about people living close to the margin in their houses that have a problem with budgeting the extra money for garbage disposal. Often these people have found alternate methods of garbage disposal to meet their budgets while they are going through tough times. This law would discriminate against them.
All this goes away if the service is voluntary and not mandatory for citizens.
I am willing to fight this with you in any way we need to. I do not even use trash service, and they are trying to force me to pay. The invoice is now $48.85 and
I have had NOTHING picked up. And I am not using the can. How is this thievery even allowed for in Ohio law? It is completely wrong.

Bids are in for the Single Hauler trash collector contract

Avatar
The pricing portion of the bids have been released and council is deciding on which company to hire.  It would be interesting to see the first 19 pages of the proposals but these were not distributed during the committee meeting last night.

See the pricing
My impression was that they really did not want to discuss the trash business further.
The only real problem is the issue of it being a manditory service for everyone in Huber Heights.
Right now I can fire my trash service at any time for any reason. If it is mandatory we do not have that option. This gives the trash service too much independence. People cannot fire the company doing the service.
Not every one has the same needs.
They did say that people on extended vacations could cancel the service while they are gone. Example: Snowbirds. People that go to Florida in the Winter would have that option. I have not seen anything in writing that would confirm what the business manager stated on that ability to cancel.
There are people that are very close to bankruptcy in Huber Heights and every penny counts towards making it. This "service" being mandatory would put these people in trouble even at extremely cheap rates.
How do you collect from such people? You cannot get blood from a stone. You cannot collect from people that have no money. Will the city have to cover the expense of attempting to collect from people?
If the firm we have the contract with goes bankrupt, then there is a problem getting a company to collect trash while the process goes forward.

Last edit: by Tom_McMasters

More discussion Mar 5th at the Public Works Committee meeting 4:30 at City Hall

Avatar
There will be more discussion on this topic at the March 5th Public works Committee meeting;

Trash Hauling RFP Update - The read ahead for this has a table with a comparison of the prices. When they did it they put in the base price for Rumpke even though this is 15% lower than the price would be today because of the fuel surcharge. This is really a bad presentation. Also we still don't see what was in the first 19 pages of the bids.

Notes from the March 5 Public Works Trash Hauling

At the meeting today, the City spelled out the trash situation. The State dictates that they do not have to vote on it as a tax. They may mandate ordinances that cost tax payers money without resorting to a vote!
The good points are that a single trash service can be cheaper than anyone currently has.
We will have better regulation of who is pushing heavy trucks over our side streets, thus making the roads last a little longer.
A single trash hauler means that we will only see a garbage truck on our streets once a week.
The service includes recyling.
Probably will start around June or July.
The bad is not everyone fits into the same shoe. Seniors do go on extended vacations and that is allowed to cancel service while they are gone. Florida Snow Birds pay attention.
People with little garbage and seniors will be charged the same as everyone else.
No allowance is made for people on the margin that are barely getting by and have to cut every corner they can in order to stay in our community. I sensed no concern about people that are living close to a very strict budget. I suggest that it may be impossible for those people to comply with such an ordinance without stretching what little money they have.
People recently unemployed comes to mind and people layed off from civil service at least one day a week.
They cannot conceive of people in a depression that have to do what they have to do to just survive.
I am not one of those people right now. But I have been where they are in my past. I think the city needs to concern itself as a lot of these people may be in a different position somewhere down the road. They do vote!
Right now they are talking of it being a minor zoning violation to not pay for your trash.
Probably on the same lines as not mowing your lawn on time.
Lawn is something that gets out of hand in a hurry when you are working and it rains every other day. But that is another story.
The other thing is the cost of handling garbage is going up thanks to our Montgomery County Commissions wanting to close the north plant.
The fuel necessary to go to the South Plant is double what it is to go to the North Plant. So when they close the plant, prices to do the service go up.
Only one trash hauler attempted to address this issue with a fuel surcharge. The rest did not. That means they could be attempting to haul our trash for free as their costs rise above their profits.
No one seemed too concerned that we might have a bankrupt trash hauler half way into the contract. Yet we could be in the position of dealing with someone else at a much higher rate if that happens.
The key word here is MANDATORY Trash Collection. Once you have one Trash Hauler you have no control over service quality. In the end we will get what we pay for.

See the HH Courier Write-up 

Last edit: by Tom_McMasters

Questions and Answers Trash Hauling Bid

Avatar
A couple of questions;

Is the city doing the billing and collecting or the trash company? or is this still being decided?

Will the city charge a convenience or billing fee if they collect the monies?

How will the city go about collecting the monies? Possibly through the water bills?

The Courier says this will be an 8 year contract, how big of a jump can we expect after this? Will the city even attempt to get a limit in place for a contract renewal with the same company? If the trash company doesn't go bankrupt during this time.

It just seems to me that the city wants their hands on my money so they can hold onto it for a month or so before they pay the bill. I understand that this might have cheaper cost bills now, but I don't need this service at all.

I have never heard of this company, Republic. How long have they been in business? Do they even have the vehicles and manpower to do a good job for the city? Are they even financially viable?

It just disappoints me that the city is creating another bill for me without needing a vote. Apparently going to council meetings doesn't make much difference because they will do what they want without the consent of the public.

Hi Doug ---- I can answer a couple of your questions and I incorporated other inputs and thoughts too.  - Tom McMasters

Is the city doing the billing and collecting or the trash company? or is this still being decided?
 
The companies will bill the customer directly.

Will the city charge a convenience or billing fee if they collect the monies?
 
N/A

How will the city go about collecting the monies? Possibly through the water bills?
 
In Dave Webb's post above he relayed my thoughts that the city may enforce non-payments of trash collection the same way they collect the fee if they have to come and mow your yard.  After thinking about this for awhile I probably was wrong.  Though that is a possibility that has not been discussed in open meeting.  The city taking enforcement action was probably more likely if they had chosen to collect the payments on behalf of the trash company.  We will have to see if this is addressed in further public meeting or when the contract details are released. 

The Courier says this will be an 8 year contract, how big of a jump can we expect after this? Will the city even attempt to get a limit in place for a contract renewal with the same company? If the trash company doesn't go bankrupt during this time.
 
I'll quibble with your contention some - eight years is a very long projection especially for these quotes (I suppose it is possible they could have lower costs when they start using natural gas trucks but do we think they will be that much lower or that the dump will be charging less soon).  I am concerned that the city may not make the contract strong enough to prevent the company from adding fees to the bill.  As far as we can tell from what we have seen from the bids, only Rumpke proposed a fuel service fee, but that doesn't mean we know the other companies aren't hoping the contract doesn't prevent them from charging this or some other fee if they need to in the future.

It just seems to me that the city wants their hands on my money so they can hold onto it for a month or so before they pay the bill. I understand that this might have cheaper cost bills now, but I don't need this service at all.


I have never heard of this company, Republic. How long have they been in business? Do they even have the vehicles and manpower to do a good job for the city? Are they even financially viable?
 
From the committee meetings we learned the Republic is the second largest trash hauling company in the nation.

It just disappoints me that the city is creating another bill for me without needing a vote. Apparently going to council meetings doesn't make much difference because they will do what they want without the consent of the public.
 
On this theme Dave Webb has attended the past few administration committee meetings and he has tried to advocate for those individuals that currently do not use public resident trash collecting services. He especially advocates on behalf of those people that cannot afford the extra costs.  I was especially annoyed when right after he spoke and again when quoted in the newspaper our public representatives say things like, "It will lower everybody's trash bill".
 
I know your situation where your business causes you to go to the public dump so you take your personal trash with you as well.  I have another neighbor who refurbishes houses and is in the same situation.  If you're not "everybody" does that make you nobody?
 
The question I have is how does council know how many nobodies there are here in Huber Heights?  I'm personally not "nobody" because my bill will go down from about $68 a quarter to less than $40 but I still think council should have investigated and stated that they knew how many people there are that don't currently pay for trash service will now have to pay. 
 
Of course it is more complicated than just that, some of the people that don't pay are inappropriately using other peoples trash service.  I think the fact that some of these people exist allow our resprentatives to justify to themselves that fact that they are ignoring those people that have legitimate other means for trash disposal. 
 
Is it possible that 50% of the Residents of Huber Heights don't use trash service today and they are getting rid of that trash legitimately?  Are there only two?  Not likely for either case.  Is it right to force 2 people into paying if the rest of the city could reduce their bill by half - yes.  Would it be right to force 50% of the people to start paying so the other 50% could reduce their bill by half?  of course not.  Where is the break point?  Not only that but if the people that weren't paying can show that they have been disposing of their trash legitimately could we have thought of an idea of how to get them exempt from this new service and negotiated that into the contract? 
 
If you happened to have read this post in the preceding 12 hours you would have seen that I had some different text that was more inflammatory.  I sat down and read yesterday's Courier this evening and found a reference to a trash collection survey the city did.  This prompted me to go to the city's website.  I searched through the main search page and did not find the survey.  I  search agenda items and did find the Trash Feasibility Study online.
 
Question 4 of that survey: Which waste collection company do you currently use?  Of 618 people surveyed 52 people chose other or skipped the question.  The rest picked a company.  If this survey is scientific then about 10% of the residents don't use residential trash service. 

Question 14.  How much do you pay for waste collection?  21.2% said less than $45 a quarter.  99 people (about 17%) didn't answer or didn't know.   I didn't realize how many people there were that possibly might not have the amount they pay go down. In other words when our city officials tell us everybody's bill will be lowered they could be ignoring 35% of the residents of Huber Heights.

Last edit: by Tom_McMasters

Avatar
I'm sorry folks but I like the idea of companies competing for my money.  We get great customer service and pay far less than the average HH citizen.  In fact, mine will go up.  I'm not a fan of our government taking away our options.  America was built on capitalism not communism.   What's next?  Our soda's too?  Get the picture?

Last edit: by Tom_McMasters

Huber Heights Trash Hauling Franchise established.

Avatar
On April 8, 2013 council approved the ordinance establishing the Single Hauler Trash Franchise for Huber Heights.  Here is a link to the agenda item.  You can find the Resolution as an attachment as well as the contract.  The resolution will take affect 30 days from the vote. 
Avatar
We have been told that the Huber Heights ordinance requiring ALL residents to pay for trash service without a vote, is legal based on an Ohio ordinance.  Has anyone seen that Ohio ordinance?

When I couldn't get through to Republic today, I called Huber Heights offices today to ask about the mandatory trash service.  A woman from *Republic* came to the phone!  She insisted I had to pay even though I didn't intend to use the service.  I asked why I wasn't going to be billed by Huber Heights, similar to the bill I receive for storm water.  She replied that it was more economical for Republic to do the billing.

Something is very strange here!

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.