The Deer Park City Council has unanimously decided to pursue a garbage collection contract with Waste Management.

The decision at its April 16 meeting followed a decision two weeks earlier to table the matter until the entire city council could hear the reasoning behind the contract recommendation from an advisory committee that studied the proposals submitted by Waste Management and Sunshine Recycling.

Former Mayor Michael Wolfe, who was part of the advisory committee, said the biggest reason the committee leaned toward Waste Management was the company’s plan to pick up garbage from every resident in Deer Park regardless of their payment status.

“We do not believe in free service,” said Sunshine General Manager Robert Evans, who claims his company is losing $5,000 a month from residents who are not paying their collection bills.

“We don’t think bad debt (in the city) is that bad,” said Waste Management’s Ken Gempil. The company is expected to start operating in the city on June 1.

City officials used to issue citations to residents, who refused to sign up for garbage service, but ended that practice last year.  Instead, Waste Management will send those residents to collection.
As part of the preliminary five-year contract offered by the city, Waste Management will freeze their proposed rates for two years and subsequent hikes tied to the Consumer Price Index.

Waste Management’s proposal calls for a monthly residential rate of $18.80 for a 32-gallon cart, which will replace garbage cans.  A commercial cart will cost $19.56 per month and a two-yard dumpster will cost $154.15.

Among the minor sticking points to the proposed contract, according to City Attorney Chuck Zimmerman, is the collection of the city’s utility tax, the responsibility of collecting hazardous waste and Waste Management’s plan to collect the city’s garbage in one day.

Despite the council’s approval of the advisory committee’s recommendation, Councilwoman Dee Cragun said the decision to table the action for two weeks was a “slap in the face” to committee members.

She said every other council committee recommendation is accepted without its members having to go through a detailed explanation on how they reached their decision.

“The integrity of the process has been attacked, and it’s unfair to the people involved with it,” Zimmerman added.

Chamber President Peggy Coyle also questioned the council’s action and its decision to let Evans explain his company’s position for 25 minutes during the April 2 meeting.

Councilman Don Stevens said the advisory committee’s anger was created by a communications misunderstanding.