• Welcome to the message board of the City Council of Universal City. Section 551.006 of the Texas Gov’t Code allows communication or exchange of information between Councilmembers about business or public policy over which the Council has supervision or control if it does not constitute a meeting or deliberation. This communication must be in writing, posted to an online message board which is viewable and searchable by the public, and the communication is displayed in real time for no less than 30 days after the communication is posted. Only Universal City Councilmembers are allowed to post on this message board. Councilmembers shall not vote or take any action that is required to be taken at a meeting by posting on this message board. In no event shall a communication or posting to this message board be construed as an action of the City Council of Universal City.

Few issues caused more concern among residents than the prior waste management contract.

council3_rubal

Well-known member
Few issues caused more concern among residents than the prior waste management contract. As our City moves forward with a new contract proposal for waste disposal, I am hopeful lessons learned from the past will better serve our residents’ needs to include options for:

1) Evaluation of the feasibility of returning residential alley service, where applicable, within our City. Alley service requires compliance with City ordinances, and an effort by our City to maintain alleyways for service vehicles. (It would be reasonable to suggest a proportion of the franchise fee might be used for maintaining municipal right-of-ways for these resident services.) Alleyway service improves the safety of streets and the aesthetics of neighborhoods by removing trash can street clutter.

2) Varying container sizes (and fees) that fit resident/commercial requirements. Resident services and costs should, to the extent possible, match their INDIVIDUAL needs.

3) Pickup assistance for the disabled that meets the needs of our residents. It is the obligation of our City to determine the number of our residents who need this service BEFORE a contract is written. Eligibility criteria for this service must be clearly written and uniformly applied.

4) Refunds/penalties/account credits for contract service failures not associated with significant weather events.

5) Execution of timely pickup schedules. Except for weather-related delays, residential pickups should be as consistent as possible with morning, midday, or afternoon services. (This allows residents to place and retrieve containers from the streets in a timely fashion.)

6) Ensure a competitive bid process with a contract tailored to the needs of our residents and businesses, with the elimination of the “contractual requirement” for donations to selected City nonprofits. This would provide the best chance for all residents and businesses to benefit from cost savings.

7) Competitive home dumpster fees. Residential dumpster fees should not exceed the cost for equivalent dumpster services assessed by our City staff with reputable providers.

8) Waste containers must meet the contract specifications.

Other Comments I have received:
9) Although I have gotten feedback from some residents that once-a-week trash pickup would suffice, it should likely be discussed since it is a major cost driver. However, given 100-degree heat and some neighborhoods with little or zero clearance between properties for areas to maintain trash cans, and those who might like to discard shrimp or fish early in the cycle, it would seem that 2x per week is very reasonable.

10) Twice yearly City-wide cleanup with dumpsters provided at no added charge to residents seems to be favorably accepted.

11) There is some division regarding the need for 1x per week recycling (and container size). It would be optimal if technology allowed for trash can readers to tailor recycling costs to residents' needs.

12) Optimally, the contract should include provisions for occasional brush pick-up at times consistent with seasonal requirements.


Finally, this issue involves every resident and business. The stakeholders must be given ample opportunity for input into this process.

As always, I would appreciate comments and suggestions from my fellow Council members.
 
I think the RFP should be broad with a menu based approach. We want a wide net with lots of options. Pricing could be for once vs twice, different container sizes, and reconsider exclusivity for roll off dumpsters.

Alley service would be nice for those that would benefit. However, our alleys are not in good shape. The cost of upkeeping them for large, automated trucks, may be cost prohibitive. Willing to look at it though.

One more thing that should be looked at is the franchise fee. I believe ours is currently 10% which is on the higher side. Reducing it would result in some lost revenue but that 10% hits lower income households harder than property tax.
 
Back
Top