Friday, January 6, 2012

Editorial: local trash collection, increases and being green


Its not easy (or cheap) being green.
SM Daily Journal/Editorial, 1/6/12. "The recent stretch of garbage rate increases on the Peninsula have some residents alarmed and even some city officials are crying foul. And there are two main roots — one is a previous policy of allowing cities to roll over what they owe for service and the other is state legislation that mandates increased recycling rates.

When Recology took over the garbage collection contact in the beginning of 2011 it adopted a new policy in which cities could not roll over what they owed in previous years for a period of 10 years. That was allowed for a number of years under the old contract and various city councils decided to roll over what they owed into what was called a balancing account so they wouldn’t pass it on to customers right away. The result of that was some cities owed money to Allied Waste when the contract expired. The amount varied. In Atherton, it was $337,000. In Belmont, it was $1,019,000. Under the new contract, cities can spread out what it owes for a shorter period of time (instead of up to 10 years) with interest at prime plus 1 percent. The prime lending rate is currently 3.25 percent. That essentially means that if cities decide to not raise the rates to what they owe, they will be paying interest on that amount, thus increasing (albeit slightly) the amount rate payers will eventually owe. For some, that makes sense since it means lower rates now.

But the core issue to garbage rates is state legislation that requires cities to recycle a certain amount. In 1989, Assembly Bill 939, authored by Byron Sher, required cities to recycle 50 percent of its waste by Jan. 1, 2000 or face fines. In 2011, Gov. Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 341 that establishes a new statewide goal of 75 percent source reduction, recycling and composting by 2020. It’s a lofty goal, but one that those in the garbage collection business take seriously. When the South Bayside Waste Management Authority contracted with Recology, it was with an eye toward meeting that goal. And thus began the weekly collection of recyclables and compostable material. There is some revenue that is produced from the recyclable material, but there is still a cost associated with the new policy of separating the material that is placed in one bin — which makes it easier for the average person to recycle. Some contend that money can be saved by returning to the twice monthly pickup of recyclable and compostable material but SBWMA officials say it is only a few percentage points overall and would go against the needed goal of recycling to meet the new state requirements.

money bagsWeekly recycling is here to stay and as more people recycle, city officials will have to determine if they want to stick with the policy of not charging more for smaller cans to which more and more people are migrating. The political answer would be to keep the rates low for smaller cans since more people use them. But, unfortunately for rate payers, that may not be sustainable in the long term.  Recycling more is good for the planet and keeps Ox Mountain landfill in Half Moon Bay open longer. Once that landfill can no longer take any more trash, costs are sure to rise again as we will have to find another place for what we throw away.  

The recent increases in rates are caused by the debt that cities accrued to keep rates low for so many years. Additional rate increases may come as cities realize that low rates for smaller cans are no longer sustainable as officials contend with aggressive recycling rates mandated by state legislation. Further into the future, there will be additional cost for shipping our trash out of the county. They say it’s not easy being green, and it looks like it’s not cheap either."

Submitted  by Jim Alex

Posted by Kathy Meeh

17 comments:

Chris Porter said...

Thank you Jim for publishing this. Coastside Scavenger did not have this "pay later" scheme with their customers and their cities so it seems to me we were the highest because other cities buffered the rates by contributing to their "balance accounts" with an additional interest percentage attached to the balance owing. A year or two from now, we will see who has the highest rates when the accounts begin to diminish. It has nothing to do with Recology raising rates but with the City governing bodies that chose to go this route, keep rates low and getting reelected. Our City officials saw the budget, hired consultants to verify the numbers and then went forward. I know the County of San Mateo has a zero balance in their balancing account and some cities have over a million dollars. Most other peninsula cities are in between.

Lionel Emde said...

Chris, I'm so glad you gave the city's position on this.

It seems to me that Pacifica was the highest (rates in the county) because the city council exercised no oversight for years and allowed Coastside Scavenger to gouge the locals at the saame time that the city enjoyed a guaranteed percentage off the top of the gouge.

Recology then came in and bought the company, hid the bad debt of Louis Picardo in higher rates (really easy when the council won't do a real audit) and continued the gouge.

You've come out of it well , congratulations.
The people of Pacifica, well, they didn't come out so well but then, who cares, right?

Anonymous said...

hahahaha very funny stuff

Kathy Meeh said...

Lionel (1001), money has to come from somewhere in this city, and the approximate 14% gross franchise fee the city is taking along with "freebee" benefits some people might consider excessive. What does 14% gross franchise fee and "freebee benefits" translate to? Probably 30-33% net? That's a big city "hold up" fee and additional risk for any business, since you mentioned "the gouge".

The editorial article and comments from Chris Porter indicate many cities grapple with and juggle these long-term scavenger contracts, including carrying debt. Reality, its no secret this city needs a much better structural economy that works to support its infrastructure, but you don't seem much interested in that. I wish you were.

Anonymous said...

Hey, what's the problem? I have nothing better to spend my money on than Recology and new city taxes and I know you don't either. Take it, take it all. Hell, you can then bury me in my blue Recology bin. In the quarry. I know I won't be disturbed.

Chris Porter said...

Lionel, you are wrong but there is no point discussing anything with you because you will not avail yourself of the information to show you are incorrect, you do not believe it when the City officials tell you you are incorrect and when it has been openly said at Council meetings that Louie Picardo paid his debt to the City, verified by the City Finance Director, City Attorney and City Manager, you still continue with this false information to make yourself feel like you know something. The article speaks for itself so please get a new hobby or tune into the Jesse Ventura Conspiracy Series on cable TV. What would you have done if this City hid the debt in a balancing account and had interest added to it? You would have screamed bloody murder. I can hear Steve Rhodes phone ringing now. There is no winning with someone who refuses to listen to the correct information so have a great year.

Joe Citizen said...

All I know is all I know. Someone in the dark comes and takes my garbage, recycle, and compost away and lowered my bill by 30% or so. I can't for the life of me understand why Lionel (whoever that is!) continues with his harping. I remember all the moaning and groaning because we didn't have single stream recycle and all the rich citys did. Now we do and most of our bills went down. I really don't get it.

Anonymous said...

Don't spend that 30% savings. They're going to want it back, soon.

Lionel Emde said...

"...money has to come from somewhere in this city, and the approximate 14% gross franchise fee the city is taking along with "freebee" benefits some people might consider excessive."

Kathy, The fee has been capped, and still rates go up. Go figure.

Chris, Coastside Scavenger was charging Pacifica the highest rates in San Mateo County YEARS before any of the items enumerated in the above article. The last time a city official seriously looked at your budget was 1995, when the city disallowed $100,000 of the charges requested by C.S.

Crime pays, evidently.

Joe Citizen said...

Lionel, you think Recology is screwing you! Go take a look at how the city is planning to pick your pocket. Utility users tax on EVERYTHING. Everyone should just plan on that tax going from around $100 a year straight to the cap which I understand will be $500! How's that for an increase my angry young man?
OBTW, at least Recology performs a service I appreciate.

Lionel Emde said...

Joe Citizen,
Bend over as Recology performs the service.

Anonymous said...

Probably with a Christmas tree from your very own neighborhood. Appreciate that Joe because you're paying for it!

Chris Porter said...

Lionel, The balancing account procedure WAS going on for years and only came to light when Allied lost all their contracts in the SBWMA to Recology. The City reviewed the budget every year and got an audit every year. THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE.

Anonymous said...

You go girl !

Pancho Villa said...

If the windmill disappears what will Don Emde battle?

Anonymous said...

I have heard there will be 5 or 6 tables staffed by task force members (and perhaps others)and each table will cover a topic from those under consideration. Those topics are mentioned on the postcard and include outsourcing the PD, more taxes, cutting library hours, cutting senior services, etc. Could be informative and I hope that there is a "misc"
table where residents can ask questions or offer ideas on other budget-related topics.

Anonymous said...

Is it Freudian that the 406anon was posted here instead of on the meeting thread? oh yeah oh yeah