Committee delays decision on per‑cart fee for in‑place trash service after tenant and contract concerns

City staff proposed changing the optional in‑place (on‑property) trash and recycling concierge fee from a flat account charge to a per‑cart charge after finding the current flat fee does not cover the hauler’s per‑cart cost.

Chris Clark, an environmental specialist with the Clean Community Division, told the committee Marborg charges the city $25 per cart per month and that the city’s existing flat fee of $44.89 per account produces an annual shortfall of about $1.2 million, which the division has been absorbing by reducing other programs. To address the gap staff offered two alternatives: Option A would immediately set the fee at $26.75 per cart per month; Option B would phase in a per‑cart charge starting at $17.67 per cart per month and use roughly $900,000 in reserves to smooth impacts through FY29.

Staff emphasized qualifying customers can still receive a waiver (age or disability) and proposed mitigation steps such as outreach to high‑cart accounts, encouraging consolidation of containers, or unsubscribing from in‑place service where feasible. Clark said the waiver process would continue to exempt eligible customers from charges and staff would proactively contact large‑cart customers to review options.

Council members raised several concerns before acting: a tenant who said they had no choice over service at their rental building and could not opt out because landlords control accounts; uncertainty about how many impacted accounts are multifamily versus single‑family; reports that the franchise hauler’s new equipment may not be performing as promised in hillside or dense‑parking areas, possibly increasing waiver requests; and legal questions about Proposition 218 and rate‑setting.

The tenant commented: “I am a tenant and I receive the premium service without being given a choice... I cannot call Marbor and unsubscribe.” Council members asked staff to return with a breakdown of multifamily vs. single‑family accounts, a clear estimate of reserve recovery impacts, clarification on where Prop 218 applies, and evidence about any service shortfalls by the hauler so the city can pursue contractual follow up as needed.

Given those outstanding questions the committee declined to select an option at the meeting and agreed to continue the item to the next month so staff can gather requested data and report back. Staff said the Clean Community Division will provide the requested information and coordinate potential contractual follow‑up with the franchise hauler.