Republic Services seeks to hike Delmont residents’ hauling bills by 74 cents |

Republic Services seeks to hike Delmont residents’ hauling bills by 74 cents

Patrick Varine
Tribune-Review file
A Republic Services garbage truck collects trash along S. 5th Street in Youngwood, on Monday, on Feb. 4, 2019.

Trash hauler Republic Services wants to add 74 cents to every Delmont customers’ bill through a provision in the borough’s hauling contract.

Borough solicitor Dan Hewitt, however, is not certain they’ve met the threshold required to hike prices under the contract’s “equitable adjustment” provision.

Republic Services Municipal Service Manager John McGoran made the request at Delmont council’s April 9 meeting, citing the ripple effect that recent Chinese recycling regulations have had on the hauling industry worldwide.

“They changed the percentage of contamination they would accept to 0.5 percent,” McGoran said. “If recycling is going to China, it had to basically be pure material. And shortly after they made that decision, all of the foreign countries that accept recycling, as well as U.S. mills, also adopted that 0.5 percent threshold.”

Hewitt asked that Republic submit a formal, written request regarding the equitable adjustment, but added that “I’m not sure that what China does fits the equitable adjustment clause.”

Language in the contract states that its provisions “may be affected by change or modification of existing laws, ordinances or executive actions which would result in substantial changes to circumstances under which (the) contract is being awarded.”

In such an event, Republic is permitted to issue a written request claiming a modification and asking for an adjustment. Once that is issued, the borough has 90 days to review and respond to the request.

Several council members cited ongoing issues residents have had with regular trash hauling.

“We still get constant calls about (hauling) issues,” Councilman Bill Marx said. “You’re asking us to approve this (price hike), but we’re not even getting valid service right now.”

When council entered into the current contract, Marx said, “a big part of the reason was that we’d be paying less, and we would get recycling. And now we’re going to have less recycling, and it’s going to cost more?”

“It’s taking less on the recycling end, but that means more is going to the landfill, which we have to pay for,” McGoran said.

The 74-cent increase would add between more than $8 per year to residential bills, McGoran said.

Hewitt said he would look into whether or not Republic Services had met the equitable adjustment threshold, and piggybacked on council’s concerns about the existing service.

“You’re asking for an equitable adjustment, but what kind of equitable adjustment are you going to make for the borough?” he asked.

McGoran said Republic officials also plan to make a push to inform residents that they can no longer recycle glass, which he said contaminates other recycling materials when it shatters during the sorting process.

He did encourage residents to recycle cardboard.

“Because of changes in commerce and online shopping, cardboard shows up on people’s doorsteps all the time now,” he said. “If we can increase our cardboard recycling, we can make up that loss on glass.”

When Penn Hills officials entered into a hauling contract with Republic in late 2018, items like glass, type 3 through 7 plastics and Styrofoam were excluded from the list of recyclables.

Patrick Varine is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Patrick at 724-850-2862, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.