right of an entity to contract with a licensed waste hauler for the collection and removal of domestic sep-tage or of grease trap waste, grit trap waste, lint trap waste, or sand trap waste.”). Unlike the language in subsection (h), the language in subsection (f) operates independently of any general grant of authority conferred by the Code and reads similarly to the languáge construed as unmistakably clear legislative intent in Laredo Merchants. See Laredo Merchs., 2016 WL 4376627, at *5 (citing Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 361.0961) (“A local government ... may not adopt an ordinance ... to ... prohibit or restrict, for solid waste management purposes, the sale or use of a container or package in a manner not authorized by state law[.]”); S. Crushed Concrete, 398 S.W.3d at 679 (<HOLDING>); cf. Quick v. City of Austin, 7 S.W.3d 109,
holding that a statute stating that a city ordinance may not make unlawful a condition or act approved or authorized under the act or the commissions rules or orders  was unmistakably clear holding city ordinance preempted by state law because ordinance prohibited act specifically allowed under state law holding that an overt act may be a verbal statement or a physical act holding with respect to a similar arizona statute the prohibited act is looking into the residential structure with the requisite wrongful purpose or intent  regardless of what or who may or may not be subject to the perpetrators unlawful gaze holding that the elements of a claim under  3729a2 are 1 that the defendant made used or caused to be made or used a record or statement to get a claim against the united states paid or approved 2 the record or statement and the claim were false or fraudulent and 3 the defendant knew that the record or statement and the claim were false or fraudulent emphasis added