Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local businesses push back as commission weighs Waste Pro contract and commercial-franchise clause
Summary
The commission heard an extended public backlash over a proposed contract with Waste Pro that includes an exclusivity/franchise provision for commercial dumpsters; business owners said the clause raises costs and prevents them from shopping competitors, while Waste Pro representatives pledged continuity and offered to provide tonnage and billing reports for follow-up.
The Oak Hill City Commission spent a large portion of its meeting addressing a proposed new contract with Waste Pro after the RFP process produced Waste Pro as the only responsive bidder.
Susie Magendance and Steve Cameron, Waste Pro representatives, told the commission the company would continue regular service and is willing to work with commissioners on contract details. "We are not that type of company," Cameron said, assuring residents: "we will be picking up your trash on November 1." He also explained how recycling collection is processed at sorting facilities and offered to provide tonnage and participation reports to the city.
Several business owners and residents pushed back strongly. Kelly Bowens, an owner operating Indian Elm Fish Camp, said her commercial bill rose from $441 to $526 and that she had found a competing quote of $259 per month; she said she never received refunds after a billing error was identified. "I went back and said, wait a second... I never got money back," Bowens said. Another commenter, Neil Bons, argued that forced use of a single franchised hauler prevents businesses from seeking competitive bids and effectively subsidizes residential pricing.
Commissioners and staff acknowledged the concerns and asked Waste Pro for follow-up data. Waste Pro said it performed a commercial audit for the prior administration and corrected identified issues; the company offered to supply reports on recycling tonnage and commercial audits. The commission requested that Waste Pro provide pricing scenarios (residential only, residential plus recycling, drop commercial exclusivity) so the city can quantify the budgetary effect of removing an exclusivity clause.
No contract vote occurred that night. Instead commissioners set a near-term schedule: Waste Pro will return with a draft contract or proposed amendments and supporting data, and the commission agreed to have a contract discussion (and possible vote) at a meeting targeted for November 10 or at a special meeting if needed. Commissioners also discussed the operational tradeoffs of a franchise-based commercial arrangement and the ways commercial revenue supports residential pricing in a bundled contract.
Public testimony included requests that the city verify the legality and fairness of mandating a single hauler for businesses and for Waste Pro to produce detailed billing/audit evidence and comparative pricing scenarios. The commission instructed staff and the company to continue negotiations and to circulate proposed contract language for review ahead of the next meeting.
