Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Trash Contract topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents’ complaints over new trash contractor prompt council follow-up with TDS

Smithville City Council · June 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council members reported widespread complaints about missed pickups and the switch to once‑weekly trash service under a new contractor (TDS); staff said TDS committed to community education, a clean sweep, and will present at the July council meeting.

Several council members told the Smithville City Council on June 17 that residents are upset about missed trash pickups, increased fees for return service calls, and the loss of the prior twice-weekly collection schedule after the city’s trash contract changed.

“One of the things I drive around a lot…there's couches in the roadway,” a council member said, describing bulk items and containers left in neighborhoods. Another member confirmed that the new contractor is currently providing once-weekly pickups and that the change reflects market availability.

Staff said they have been fielding daily complaints and have scheduled a meeting with the contractor on June 22. “I've got his commitment that they're gonna do some more education,” a council member said about follow-up with the contractor, and staff said TDS has promised a 'clean sweep' once the reporting and scheduling issues are worked out. The council asked that TDS make a presentation at the July council meeting so residents’ questions can be addressed directly.

Staff discussed options to help residents who cannot call in bulk pickups themselves (for example, older residents), saying city staff taking bulk pickup requests could raise tracking and resource problems; instead staff recommended outreach and community-assistance approaches and said they will raise the topic with the contractor at the June 22 meeting.

No formal contract change or vote was made at the meeting; staff and council set a date for the contractor to appear before council and to provide a plan for correcting service problems.