The Fullerton City Council majority moved forward with “narrowing” the field of bidders for the City’s next solid waste contract by adding three companies (Valley Vista, Athens, and Republic) to the top three recommended by staff. During the special meeting, held at 4pm on April 14, six companies which had spent months developing responsive submissions to the city’s Request for Proposals were directed by Mayor Jung “to sharpen up your pencils.” Mayor Jung brushed off questions asking for clearer direction.

The special study session’s purpose was to obtain City Council direction on the next phase of the Solid Waste Management Services RFP (Request for Proposals) continued progress toward a contract award, and to remain compliant with CalRecycle’s CAP (Corrective Action Plan) deadline which allows up to 24 months from date of violation for a jurisdiction to come into compliance with SB 1383 or suffer penalties up to $10,000 per day. The upcoming CAP deadlines for Fullerton are July 2026 and July 2027.

City staff described the process as a first-of-its-kind effort for Fullerton, shaped over two years through contract review, municipal comparisons, and community input. The RFP was issued in September 2025, nine proposals were received, and all firms were interviewed in January 2026 before final rankings were completed.

Below is the list of companies and their rankings:

A five-member evaluation committee (Director of Public Works Stephen Bise; Assistant Director Public Works/Maintenance Richard Armendariz;  Public Works Administrative Manager Jerome Joaquin;  Environmental Services Coordinator Olivia Martinez; and Senior Management Analyst Kim Chaudry)  reviewed proposals using 15 criteria, including cost, experience, compliance, and service quality, to name a few. Based on this review, three firms—EDCO, CR&R, and Universal Waste Systems—were identified as the top-ranked and most qualified of the nine.

Below is a summary of each company created after vetting and interviews by the evaluation committee.

Solid Waste RFP Evaluation Summary

Staff asked Council to focus on pricing, service value, and transition planning, noting the selected vendor would be a long-term partner. Council was asked to choose between negotiating exclusively with the top-ranked firm or continuing to compare multiple firms before making a final decision. The “ad hoc committee”, consisting of councilmembers Fred Jung and Jamie Valencia, in February recommended expanding consideration to six firms total, adding Republic Services, Athens Services, and Valley Vista – “to broaden the Council’s options” Mayor Jung said.

Following a staff presentation recommending the top three firms – EDCO, CR&R, and Universal Waste Systems (UWS) – the Council majority (Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia) voted to add Valley Vista, Athens Services, and Republic Services. The selected firms were directed to return with revised, more competitive pricing as the City works toward awarding a new agreement set to begin July 1, 2027.

With six bidders now advancing, City staff will continue negotiations and return to the Council with updated proposals. The final contract is expected to be awarded ahead of the 2027 deadline. The outcome will determine waste collection services—and rate structures—for tens of thousands of Fullerton residents and businesses for years to come.

Public Comments

The meeting drew resident comments despite being held at 4 pm on a Tuesday.  Several of the nine prospective contractors also spoke during Public Comments.

Elijah Manassero, District 5. “I urge the Council to follow the staff’s recommendation to narrow the field to the top three companies. Each offers different benefits. EDCO ranked highly overall and has a local terminal, which could contribute to economic development. CR&R ranked highly in compliance, which could support risk mitigation. Universal Waste Systems offers strong pricing and value.”

“In my view, Athens and Valley Vista are not as strong based on the evaluation criteria, particularly regarding compliance with SB 1383.

“It should also be noted that Valley Vista contributed $15,000 to Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform, which supported recent council campaigns. Given that all companies had equal opportunity during the interview process, no bidder should receive special consideration.”

‘This decision should be based on objective data and the scoring criteria previously adopted by the Council.”

Andrew, a longtime Fullerton resident. “I want to express concerns about Valley Vista. In the City of Cypress, the company requested significant rate increases—10% for residential and 17% for commercial services—beyond standard adjustments.”

“City records indicate that the franchise became financially unsustainable, resulting in service reductions, including the elimination of graffiti removal and reduced bulk item pickup. Additionally, Valley Vista ranked near the bottom in SB 1383 compliance, which could expose the City to penalties. Finally, I believe companies making political contributions to local campaigns should be carefully evaluated in procurement decisions.”

Valley Vista Services is among the potential contractors and has made significant contributions to Bushala’s Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform PAC. Schedule A Monetary Contributions Received – California form 460 from 7/1/2024 to 10/19/2024

Below: Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform’s required 460 form showing over $61,000 spent opposing Vivian Jaramillo’s District 4 campaign where Jamie Valencia won by 53 votes. Similar expenditures by the political action committee in past elections benefited the campaigns of both Jung and Dunlap. Due to these connections – questions have arisen about the selection of Jung and Valencia for the two-member ad hoc committee to help select the city trash franchisee and specifically their direction to add Valley Vista.

Jeffrey Otter, Treasurer for the Craig Park East Homeowners Association. “I am here representing residents concerned about the long-term fiscal impact of the city’s waste services contract,” he said.

Otter’s Key Points:

• Cost Score Gap: Independent analysis shows Valley Vista (38/40) and NASA (35/40) significantly outperforming the Staff-recommended firms, EDCO (20/40) and CR&R (20/40), on initial pricing.
• Hidden Weighting: Proposed rates account for 20% of the City’s total evaluation criteria, yet the specific scores from the City’s official evaluation board were not disclosed during the public meeting.
• The 15,000-Home Impact: Approximately 15,000 multifamily units will be shifted from residential to commercial rate structures to comply with state recycling laws (SB 1383, AB 1826), creating a complex new billing landscape.
• Legal Vulnerability: Without a formal Cost of Service Analysis, the City may lack the mathematical evidence required by Proposition 218 to prove that new rates are proportional and fair for all residents.

Fullerton resident, “I think the staff did a strong job evaluating the companies. One question I have is why lower-rated companies were elevated for re-consideration. I am not suggesting that it is incorrect, but I would like to understand the reasoning. As a resident, two things are important to me in any contract: maintaining unlimited large-item pickup, which helps keep the city clean, and having a convenient centralized waste drop-off or pickup option to encourage proper disposal [of hazardous wastes].”

David Perez from Valley Vista Services (rated 6th among the nine proposals) expressed gratitude for the opportunity to participate in the RFP process and emphasized his company’s commitment to providing exceptional services.  Perez acknowledged that Vista’s proposal may have lacked sufficient context and details about their capabilities and team. He highlighted their investments in resources and technology to ensure compliance and deliver high-quality services at reasonable prices. He concluded by expressing hope for the opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to the community through quality service and engagement.

Julie Beretta, Senior Vice President with CR&R (rated 2nd out of the 9 proposals) said, “We would like to highlight enhancements included in our proposal:

• “We believe it is in the City’s best interest for the hauler to manage residential billing, reducing administrative burden on the City. We proposed this service at no cost, which would improve our ranking. Our customer service center would handle all calls, improving response times and service quality.
• “Local infrastructure is also critical. Our Stanton facility, located 3.7 miles from Fullerton, would serve the City. Our executive team is based there, and we operate multiple facilities across Orange County.
• “We can also provide union employees from Teamsters Local 396 starting on day one.
• “We invite Councilmembers to tour our facilities, including our recycling center and anaerobic digester.
• “Additionally, we proposed $2 million in enhanced services, including street sweeping, downtown improvements, and infrastructure support. These were not fully reflected in the scoring.

“We respectfully request consideration for inclusion in negotiations,” said CR&R VP Julie Beretta.

Gloria Alvarado. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this process. I agree with earlier comments that, in the effort to present a strong proposal, the human element and long-term commitment may not always be fully conveyed. I encourage the Council to allow workers to share their experiences and commitment to the community. Cost is important, but quality of service must also be considered. The lowest bid does not always represent the best outcome.

Council Discussion

Councilmembers discussed the need to balance residential and commercial impacts as the process moves forward.

•Councilmember Dr. Shana Charles participated via Zoom and asked whether firms were allowed to revise their proposals after the interview process.

Staff responded that all nine firms were allowed to submit a best-and-final pricing option and to propose additional enhancements throughout the process. Firms were also asked to clarify and resubmit certain pricing information to ensure consistency and to ensure requirements are understood.

Councilmember Charles confirmed that the final rankings reflected those revisions, and staff confirmed that they did, including updated pricing based on new landfill disposal rates under the county agreement.

Councilmember Charles then asked the City Attorney about potential conflicts of interest related to campaign contributions mentioned during public comment.

Special Counsel Patrick Munoz explained that under the Levine Act, certain direct campaign contributions above a specified threshold could create a disqualifying conflict. However, contributions to political action committees are not subject to the same restrictions and would not create a legally disqualifying conflict. He added that if a disqualifying conflict did exist, Councilmembers are required to disclose such contributions through public filings.

•Councilmember Dr. Ahmad Zahra asked the majority of the questions.

“My first question is so the public can understand the process. Could staff explain who was on the ad hoc committee and who was also on the selection or review committee? It doesn’t specify in the staff report other than the two council members.”

Staff responded that the ad hoc committee is composed of Mayor Fred Jung and Councilmember Jamie Valencia.

The Evaluation Committee included Stephen Bise, Director of Public Works; Richard Armendariz, Assistant Director of Public Works Maintenance; Jerome Joaquin, Public Works Administrative Manager; Olivia Martinez, Environmental Services Coordinator; and Kim Chaudry, Senior Management Analyst.

“The ad hoc was only two members?” Zahra asked.

“Yes, that was approved by City Council on May 20, 2025. It is normally a two-member ad hoc committee,” staff clarified.

“When it states the ad hoc committee met again on February 24 and supported consideration of the top three firms, and also recommended considering three additional firms at the study session—Republic, Athens, and Valley Vista—that was just the two council members,” Zahra noted that the term “committee” may imply a larger group to the public.

He then asked staff to identify comparable cities served by the top-ranked applicants.

Staff responded that EDCO services cities including Buena Park and Lakewood; CR&R services multiple cities in Orange County, including Newport Beach residential and Laguna Beach; and Universal Waste Systems serves Los Alamitos and South Gate, which has a population of about 90,000. Zahra questioned whether city size factored into the evaluation, noting that some listed cities are smaller than Fullerton. Staff confirmed that city size was considered as part of the evaluation criteria.

Consultant Michael Bellah added that CR&R has approximately 19 franchises in Orange County and serves much of South Orange County, while EDCO serves cities including Stanton and Orange, the latter being more comparable in size to Fullerton.

Some selected firms proposed higher residential rates than Republic Services noted Zahra who asked how that was evaluated.

Staff explained that while Republic and Universal offered lower residential rates, those costs were offset by significantly higher commercial rates.

“They were not as equitable,” staff said, adding that the evaluation included 15 criteria categories, including operations, service reliability, financial capacity, and SB 1383 compliance.

Staff stated that EDCO, CR&R, and Universal Waste Systems offered value-added services beyond the base requirements, which contributed to their rankings. Pricing remained an important factor, but not the only one.

Zahra clarified that “commercial” rates apply not only to businesses but also to multifamily housing of five units or more under the proposed model.

Staff confirmed that under the new agreement, properties with four units or fewer would be classified as residential, while five units or more would be considered commercial.

What about bulky item pickup?  

Staff explained that the current contract provides unlimited bulky item pickup, while the proposed agreement would shift to quarterly service for single-family homes. Multifamily properties would continue to handle bulky item requests through property management. Staff responded to Zahra’s concerns – that reduced frequency could cause neighborhood issues – saying that service levels could still be negotiated depending on Council direction. The current system allows for a quick response to complaints. On hazardous waste, staff stated that disposal is handled through the Orange County Waste & Recycling program, with a nearby facility in Anaheim, and that access would remain unchanged under a new contract.

What about green waste and yard maintenance?

Staff explained that SB 1383 requires all customers to have three-stream service—trash, recycling, and organics—which includes green waste and food waste. Residents can request additional carts for an added cost if needed. Asked how that compares to current service – staff said it is largely similar, with flexibility for additional carts based on household needs.

What about community benefits and event funding similar to Republic Services contributions?

Staff said enhancements and community contributions were a significant factor in ranking the top proposers. These include franchise fees, compliance fees, and additional services. EDCO’s potential development of a local terminal was noted as a possible source of property and sales tax revenue. CR&R proposed several enhancements, including compliance assistance, additional recycling carts, and potential curbside collection of household hazardous waste. Staff said event funding would be incorporated into city fees under the new agreement, including support for events such as the Fourth of July and First Night.

Zahra also asked about workforce impacts of changing from Republic to another provider.

Staff stated that all proposers indicated they would absorb union workers from Republic Services and offer local hiring opportunities. Zahra asked if that commitment would be included in the contract. Staff confirmed it would.

Will Republic Services, as the current provider, be allowed to submit a counterbid?

Staff said that was not part of the process. Staff also noted that Republic proposed continuing to use some older trucks, which raised concerns given past operational issues and compliance requirements. The consultant, Mr. Bellah, added that the City had spent several years negotiating with Republic under a CalRecycle compliance mandate, including rate discussions, but ultimately was required to issue an RFP to avoid potential penalties.

Zahra acknowledged the history but noted that turnover in City leadership may have affected negotiations. He reiterated concerns about the transition’s impacts and suggested that allowing the current provider to match competing bids could minimize disruption for residents.

•Councilmember Jamie Valencia thanked everyone, said she was so honored to be selected for the ad hoc, and proposed removing pricing structures from initial evaluations to prioritize service quality.

•Mayor Fred Jung suggested focusing solely on pricing.  He said one bidder, NASA, was not included among the finalists due to a lack of experience serving cities the size of Fullerton.

•Mayor Protem Nick Dunlap referenced the importance of considering how the new rate structure would affect businesses and multifamily properties.

Below is the State of California action against Fullerton – scroll to the end to see most recent deadlines. If Fullerton fails to take corrective action or deadlines are not met – fines can be as much as $10,000 per day:

2025Jun30FullertonCAP