Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney outlines Republic waste contract, council hears rate-history and renewal timeline
Summary
City Attorney summarized Mount Pleasant’s exclusive franchise agreement with Republic, explaining contract terms, CPI-based annual rate adjustments and that residential rates rose about 18% since 2019; council asked questions but took no formal action on the contract itself.
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Pleasant’s city attorney told the council on April 21 that the city’s solid-waste services are governed by a sole-and-exclusive franchise agreement with Republic that dates to at least 1998 and was renewed in 2020.
“The agreement provides for a sole and exclusive franchise and includes rolloff dumpsters and construction waste,” the city attorney said, explaining that the contract also yields franchise-fee revenue to the city. The attorney said the contract contains a change-of-law clause and a 180‑day nonrenewal window before its scheduled 2030 expiration.
On rates, the attorney said charges to residences and businesses have increased over time and described the contract’s automatic adjustments: annual changes track the Consumer Price Index for the Dallas–Fort Worth area, and increases up to about 5% may take effect without an additional council hearing. He summarized the staff calculations included in the packet: residential rates rose from roughly $16.41 (2019 base) to about $19.44, an increase the attorney described as “about 18.46%” since 2019 and about “24.46%” over a roughly 10‑year span.
Council members asked whether anything approved at a prior meeting had changed; the attorney said enforcement tools added to city ordinances were supplements to the contract and that the agreement itself had not changed since the previous meeting. Mayor Pat and other council members noted limited citizen follow-up after Republic’s attendance at a prior meeting.
No motion was made to alter the contract at the April 21 session. The attorney said any future legal changes—either by the Legislature or court decisions—could prompt amendments under the contract’s change-of-law provision.

