Fishers Trash Talk – here we go again!

A look at nearby cities and their monthly contract rates, from the City of Fishers

Fishers has a very important public hearing at 9am, Tuesday, August 13, in the City Hall Auditorium.  The issue under discussion has a history going back 2013, when Fishers was a town.

In 2013, Town Councilor David George raised the issue of the town contracting a rate for all town residents, providing a way to save money for residents with one municipal contract.  The then-Town-Manager Scott Fadness had his staff go through the legal procedure of taking bids

The town held a public hearing in 2013 to take comments on the proposed best contract offer, in the opinion of the town, from Republic.  Let’s just say the comments were not positive.

I recently had dinner with Scott Fulton, and friend and fellow journalist.  I could not cover that 2013 public hearing so I had Scott cover it for me.  He couldn’t believe it when I told him Fishers was once again looking to have a city contract for trash collection services.  The public backlash was so severe, Scott never imagined Fishers would consider one public trash contract again.

Fast forward to 2023.  At the end of a routine City Council meeting, Councilor David Giffel raised the possibility of a city-wide trash collection contract to save residents money in fees.  Scott Fadness, John Weingardt and Pete Peterson were all involved in town government during 2013.  Fadness was town manager, Weingardt & Peterson were members of the 7-member town council.  They all remembered the huge public blowback in 2013.

David Giffel was unsuccessful in his re-election campaign for another term on the Council, but the City of Fishers began the process of accepting bids at the start of 2024.  Bids were filed, negotiations were held, and the city announced the bids, finding Republic to be the best of the 3 proposals received.

The next step in the process is the 9am public hearing August 13, before the Fishers Board of Public Works and Safety.  The board consists of three members…Mayor Scott Fadness and his 2 appointees, Jeff Lantz & Jason Meyer.

That board will listen to public comments and will likely send the item to the City Council.  Thus, the public hearing August 13 is a key step in this process.

I am already seeing rumblings of discontent online about the Republic bid.  Tom Britt, owner of the local publishing operation Towne Post, argues in a recent post that Fishers Republic contract will “result in Fishers residents having to pay the highest trash rates in Hamilton County.”

There is at least one Homeowners Association (HOA) that plans to testify at the public hearing that they have negotiated a lower rate than the city would in 2025 with the proposed Republic contract.

A Board of Works member asked the mayor at a recent meeting about perhaps negotiating some better terms.  The mayor had a few remarks to make.

First, his view is that Republic is taking a huge risk with the contract, which extends out to 10 years.  There is no provision for Republic to raise rates if fuel costs skyrocket anytime during that 10-year pact.

He also argued that some HOAs may have a few more years of lower rates than the city’s Republic contract, but those same HOAs may be shocked at the rates offered in any new contract.  Fadness says the HOAs will still save money in the long-run during the city’s deal with Republic.

If the Board of Works sends this contract proposal to the City Council, that body will have the final say.

I have no idea how this trash collection contract will end up, but it appears Fishers is in for some more public controversy by the time this is all said and done.

The city has more information on this trash issue at this link.

 

The Republic bid to Fishers for monthly trash service costs, with year one 2025

2 thoughts on “Fishers Trash Talk – here we go again!

  1. I have a few issues
    – how much is this city administration that every resident will have to pay?
    – how much do other communities garage their residents for an administration deal?
    – if you look at all three bids, the bid that actually works out to be less expensive is NOT from Republic. The lowest overall rate is for Priority. Republic may be less expensive for years 1-3, bit Priority is less expensive for years 4-10. Why is the city not recommending the Priprity contract?
    – finally why haven’t we seen full contracts from each proposal?

    Thank you

  2. I noticed immediately that this proposed contract is significantly more expensive for less service compared to the one negotiated just last year between Carmel and Republic. Fishers is a similar size city, one would think that the two cities would have similar bargaining power.

    It’s completely possible that there are other differences in the minutia that aren’t easily findable by the average joe that would explain this discrepancy – if anyone could shed any light on this, it would certainly be helpful!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.