The Jackson City Council approved a six-year garbage contract with Richard's Disposal. However, the contract does not include the mandatory use of his precious 96-gallon garbage carts. WLBT reported:
Following a marathon meeting on Tuesday, the Jackson City Council narrowly approved entering into a six-year contract with Richard’s Disposal, if the company would be willing to nix contract provisions regarding the purchase of some 45,000 trash carts.
The council made the decision, in part, to lower the contract’s overall $64 million cost. The carts are expected to cost around $96 a piece, adding some $4.3 million to the contract’s overall price tag.
“There are already tens of thousands of carts in the city of Jackson. Lots of people have them... So, the thought of buying 45,000 more garbage carts, and then trying to figure out who gets them and then, you know, who’s responsible for them, I think that’s one thing. But the more important thing is the $4.3 million that’s added to the cost of the contract,” Ward One Councilman Ashby Foote said. “We’ve already got a situation where we don’t have enough funds... to actually pay all our garbage bills.”....
Voting in favor of the amended contract were Councilmembers Aaron Banks, Angelique Lee, Virgi Lindsay, and Brian Grizzell. Opposed were Councilmen Ashby Foote, Vernon Hartley, and Kenneth Stokes.
The vote came after nearly two hours of heated discussion, and after Stokes made several motions to amend the council order authorizing the mayor to enter into the agreement..... Rest of article.
Mayor Lumumba issued the following statement in celebration of his victory:
Kingfish note: This fight may not be over. The Mayor has been always willing to die on the hill of 96-gallon garbage carts. Let's see how vigorously he pushes Richard's Disposal to remove the clause."We are extremely pleased to announce the City Council voted earlier today to approve a six-year contract with Richard’s Disposal, Inc. to ensure we have a professional and reliable garbage collection company in the City of Jackson. It has been the culmination of over three years of multiple RFP processes, town halls and special council meetings. This was never about scoring political points; it is about giving our taxpayers the value and service they deserve.
Throughout this process, Richard’s has proven it has the capability to do the job and secure a Jacksonian workforce a good paying job with benefits they would not receive with previous vendors. It is a testament to their integrity that they stuck around in the first place after being so unfairly treated. We offer a great deal of gratitude to them and their workers for believing in Jackson, and working on behalf of our residents, when the easier option would have been to leave.
We still believe that a garbage cart, common in most cities including the metro Jackson area, is a wise investment that will prevent clutter and alleviate the workload of Richard’s workers. But we also know that the certainty of a final garbage contract is the larger gain of residents.
This garbage contract and process has always been about the quality of life of our residents. It is for this reason we found this not only a worthwhile investment, but an essential one. We can’t go back to the original contract, which would have saved the city and residents millions of dollars, but we can move forward with the knowledge this current contract is a huge leap forward. It was a hard-fought process. Our residents deserve it.
I want to thank the council members, and the many community and neighborhood organizations who stood up for our residents in a trying time. You continue to remind me that the best of Jackson is both attainable and achievable."
24 comments:
Banks loses, that is for damn sure. Don't even bother running for Mayor Banks.
Thank goodness this is over. I hope we hear no more about Jackson garbage for another 5 years and 364 days - that is when the council will take it up again. I am sick, sick, sick of trash talk. Let's move on.
Tho makes money off the garbage carts?
So much BS in the Mayor's statement - not surprising.
"It is a testament to their integrity that they stuck around in the first place after being so unfairly treated." - I don't understand why he continues to make statements like this when there is/was pending litigation by this company against the City. Anyone with common sense would not want to say anything that could be construed as admitting the City is at fault, however he seemed to be blatantly encouraging Richard's to file a lawsuit against the City during this entire process.
I haven't read through the agreement in enough detail to tell if Richards is agreeing to drop the lawsuit against the City if we enter into this new agreement but if it isn't dropped after this, he's trying to sabotage us even more than I previously thought.
And I can't believe he's STILL trying to drum up positive PR for the carts. Get over yourself. Would uniform carts look lovely? Sure. But that's a "luxury" we can't afford. I'd rather we take that money and fill a few more potholes.
Those 96-gal carts could hold a lot of grease. Right?
The 96 gallon carts are the Mayuhs Trojan Horse. He knows he'll never get the carts approved, right, but he WILL get an "amended" contract with Richards Disposal without the carts and that's all the Mayuh and Richards wanted in the first place.
"This was never about scoring political points"
We know that. It was about the $$, especially the side deal for the 96-gallon carts.
My guess is that the Mayor will negotiate little to no reduction in the monthly cost of the contract but will remove the carts and play it as if he did what the council wanted and removed the carts from the contract. Then the other company who responded to the rfp will sue the city because if they would have known that the city didn’t want carts then their bid would have won.
... however he seemed to be blatantly encouraging Richard's to file a lawsuit against the City during this entire process.
Lawsuit was a joint strategy from the outset. Dishonesty is Antard's second middle name.
There will be zero reduction in the price of the contract. By ratifying the contract the council aggreged to the price "as is." Its clear that the council doesn't understand the garbage industry. The savings from carts will be spent on higher insurance premiums and workman's comp liability over the course of the contract. The only REAL way to reduce cost is move to once per week collection and/or fully automate collection. The City should have hired a solid waste consultant, I know a really good one, to guide them in writing the RFP. It would have saved 100s of thousands of dollars in direct contractor costs and legal fees. Good luck Jackson.
That joker actually refers to "the quality of life" of Jackson residents in his statement.
The next great American novel should be about the quality of life in Jackson.
Let me get this right. A large part of our problem is the fact that so many of our citizens do not pay for water, sewer or garbage. How many times has the folks in charge said they were going to shut off the water but never do that. So, we continue to go along with about 50% of the folks trying to keep that part of the city going. Our newer head of the water service says he owes $10 million dollars but only has $2 million on hand. How’s that working out. Come on Bennie we need more government money or just maybe someone will actually start shutting off water on folks not paying their part.
10:58, I was at the CC meeting. You are right about the strong possibility of the other company suing because the terms were changed after the fact. This also leaves an opening for other companies that did not bid to sue because "we would have bid under these new requirements". Councilman Hartley asked that question. The CC lawyer (I think that's who he is) said they could not sue for that, but then said Richards could sue if the CC changed the requirements. Huh?
March 20, 2024 at 9:43 AM
Not by a long shot. There's still trash in the mayor's office.
Best part about this news, is that we don’t have to hear about it anymore.
But how will Sistah get paid if she can’t sell her carts?
$96 is cheap. I'm gping to have to spend 7 times more than that to buy retail.
I so hate politics as it causes deliberate ignorance!
@9:09 Check your math. Is $96 less than what you'd pay for one at Lowe's, sure. But if you plan to pay almost $700 for one, I'll sell you mine for $600 and save you a few bucks!
I know the carts are now out of the contract, but was anyone ever able to confirm which subcontractor or supplier Richard's planned to use for the carts this go around?
I looked up the subcontractor out of Michigan that Lumumba tried to slip into the original FCC proposal back in 2021 who was to provide the carts, delivery and service (Cascade Engineering, Inc. based out of Grand Rapids, Michigan) and was it a coincidence that there is an EVP there by the name of "Kenyatta Lumumba London Brame"? If it can be proved that this was a relative of "our" Lumumba, why did more local media not pick up this story at the time? Or did they and I just missed it? Did Lumumba ever address whether this was a related party? https://theorg.com/org/cascade-engineering-inc/org-chart/kenyatta-brame
the carts are $$ for chauk somehow, its the IT services 65K$ a month bill that's the gravy they are enjoying now ....
look at the "IT" portion of the contract, is it still a separate pay item to a third party vendor (wink wink)
So RD is the lowest BUT they then can afford to SUB to the company that was HIGHER than them? HUH????
Have any of the garbage payments to RD been late like all the other vendors?
I have had a 69-gallon garbage can from Waste Management since they first contracted with the city. It's beginning to crack.
The replacement costs with the available 65-gallon options to consumers are more expensive that the 69-gallon ones were in the contract. That is because the 69 gallons are bought in bulk all over the Nation and are in high demand and are commercial grade. They are designed in such a way as to be easier, not harder to roll and lift.
I am a female. I am small and fit but not a fitness nut. I am old now. I have, without difficulty rolled my 69 gallon in all weather by myself as my husband was often out of town for his business. It is no more difficult than it was at age 31...46 years ago.
Politics is making us inefficient and stupid! ALL of you seem to have forgotten the Waste Management scandal of in 1999 when WM had to pony up $457 million settlement to its shareholders. You've ignored its corporate record.
I think too many of y'all only see black and white, republican or democrat. That's such a poor basis of assessment. Why? Because every race, every religion, every group of humans has its good folks, smart folks and rotten, no-good scum. It really isn't THAT hard to tell IF you know the traits of each.
@10:21am - Lots to unpack here...
1) You keep referring to a 69-gallon cart. Do you mean to say you have a 96-gallon cart like what the mayor wanted under this contract? You seem very familiar with 65/69-gallon carts, and I agree that these are very easy to roll, but these would not have been allowed under the original terms of the contract, as they are over 35 gallons (if you elected to use your own it had to be 35 gallons or less per the proposed contract).
I used a 96-gallon can in another city which had once per week collections (and bi-weekly recycling), and can say from experience it is not as easy to handle, even as a younger person. I would not have been *as* vehemently opposed to the 96-gallon carts had we been allowed to use our 65-gallon carts as an alternative, but it still would have seemed wasteful given the number of 65-gallon and other perfectly fine existing carts I see around the city.
2) My distrust of the mayor and this contract have nothing to do with race. I suspect that Kenny Stokes' distrust of the mayor and this contract has nothing to do with race. I agree with your statement that "every race, every religion, every group of humans has its good folks, smart folks and rotten, no-good scum." Doesn't this mean that it is possible for certain current and/or former City officials to be just as corrupt as current and/or former State officials?
3) Are you asserting that the WM corporate scandal of 1999 between the company and its shareholders should be weighted more heavily in deciding our current trash provider than Richard's Disposal's performance record in New Orleans? Will preface this by saying I have not had any significant issues with Richards' performance during the emergency contracts, but was it really wrong to be concerned with potential performance issues popping up once a long-term contract is agreed upon after reading some of these stories out of New Orleans?
https://www.fox8live.com/2023/01/10/two-new-orleans-trash-contractors-gain-routes-after-pickup-lapse-which-richards-disposal-has-regret/
https://www.nola.com/news/politics/richards-disposal-garbage-collections-falter-in-new-orleans/article_503dcc6c-8bc3-11ed-a79f-878a062bf907.html
Post a Comment