Changes look likely for residential garbage disposal in Brookhaven, but a final decision by aldermen remains steeped in dissension and could be weeks away depending on the outcome of pending negotiations.

     At Tuesday night’s meeting, aldermen tentatively settled on a plan calling for twice a week residential garbage pickup, as there is now, plus curbside pickup of recyclables once a week.

     This pickup schedule would cost the city almost exactly what it pays now for twice a week garbage pickup alone, city officials said.

     “We’re getting a free service for what we’re paying now,” said Ward Five Alderman D.W. Maxwell, highlighting the value of the curbside recycling option.

     Aldermen then want the option after one year to transition to one garbage pickup day and one curbside recycling day. This option could save approximately 75,000 or more a year over current rates, said Mayor Les Bumgarner.

     Bumgarner suggested the savings under this plan could be funneled into a reduction in garbage fees residents pay.

     Such a pickup schedule would also motivate increased participation in recycling, said Ward Four Alderman Shirley Estes.

     What proved much more controversial, however, was a decision about which companies the city should attempt to negotiate a final contract with.

     According to state statute, once the proposals for garbage disposal have been received, the relevant governing authority must select which proposal or proposals it deems most credible and enter into negotiations with those companies.

     In initial proposals opened last week, Waste Pro came in at about $476,000 cheaper than the proposal offered by Waste Management, the company that currently holds the city’s waste contract.

     Ward Six Alderman David Phillips made a motion to negotiate with both companies to determine which would ultimately offer the lowest price.

     However, Maxwell pushed to only negotiate with Waste Pro, a move Bumgarner strongly opposed.

     “I don’t want to negotiate with but one company, the one that put their best foot forward,” said Maxwell, emphasizing Waste Pro’s initial proposal.

     Bumgarner countered that by only negotiating with one company, the city would lose the leverage needed to push prices lower.

     “If you negotiate with one company, you think they will negotiate with themselves? That they will just come in and cut their price?” Bumgarner said.

     Maxwell’s proposal selecting Waste Pro as the lone negotiation partner ultimately passed with the support of Ward One Alderman Dorsey Cameron, Ward Two Alderman Terry Bates and Ward Three Alderman Mary Wilson.

     Phillips voted against the move, while Estes and Alderman at Large Karen Sullivan abstained. Sullivan said she didn’t understand the issues being discussed well enough to vote, and Estes said she did not want to participate in the polarization present around the table.

     Bumgarner threatened to veto the move Tuesday night, but Wednesday morning said he’d begin negotiations with Waste Pro and only veto if he is dissatisfied with these negotiations.

     Maxwell’s motion set a negotiation deadline of Sept. 26. The current contract with Waste Management ends on Oct. 1.

     Though he’s ready to negotiate with Waste Pro, Bumgarner told board members that by cutting Waste Management out of the negotiations they are leaving behind nearly $115,00 in savings Waste Management has offered since the initial proposals were opened.

     Speaking after the meeting, Maxwell said even if Waste Management were willing to come lower than Waste Pro, there are other good reasons to stick with Waste Pro.

     “I’m looking at it from an ethical and moral standpoint,” Maxwell said, suggesting Waste Management has not dealt fairly with the city by not initially offering their lowest proposal.

     Further, Maxwell suggested that if Waste Pro is not given consideration, the city will not be able to attract competitive proposals in the future, leaving Waste Management with a monopoly.

     Maxwell also believes Bumgarner may have violated the state statute that requires the board first select proposals before negotiations can begin.

     Bumgarner has admitted he wasn’t aware of this statute’s details until Tuesday and had contact with Waste Management about their proposal, but said he doesn’t feel he violated any laws.

     “I wouldn’t think so,” Bumgarner said. “I can’t stop someone from making a proposal to me. That’s what (Waste Management) did.”

     City Attorney Joe Fernald agreed and said he believes any contact Bumgarner and Waste Management had after the proposals were opened was only informal conversation and not the kind of formal contract negotiations that required board approval.

     Further, Fernald said any contact Bumgarner had with Waste Management was no different than contact he believes Waste Pro representatives have had with aldermen.

     “To the best of my knowledge there were conversations by all the parties with everyone,” Fernald said. “The two (companies) have lobbied all through the process.”

     The move to negotiate with Waste Pro comes after Lincoln County supervisors on Monday also chose to enter into contract negotiations with Waste Pro, though a final contract has not been approved.