Left In Lowell

Trash Deficit Is Half of City’s Deficit

by Lynne at 11:49 am.

The Sun has a good Chris Scott article today on the now-projected $6M budget deficit the city faces:

The city’s projected budget deficit for next year has nearly doubled from an estimated $3.6 million in early April to about $6 million today, a jump City Manager Bernie Lynch attributes primarily to departmental “wish lists” that aren’t based in fiscal reality.

Interesting, concerning, though seemingly, something we might be able to work carefully to reduce.

However, later in the article, Scott writes about the trash budget deficit:

A growing gap between trash revenue and trash expenditures. City residents pay $100 annually for trash pickup. Last year, that generated nearly $3 million. The bill to the city, however, is closer to $6 million.

This is half of this projected budget deficit, and if addressed fully, would mean less cuts elsewhere. You can bet Lynch has his eye on it.

Of course, merely increasing our yearly fee for trash pickup would go a long way towards alleviating the deficit, but it’s not enough. I think we could even avoid raising the fee entirely if we completely reassess how trash collection works in Lowell.

First up, no other local community just picks up everything people put out. No town I’ve ever lived in ever did it. Couches and big items cost extra in other communities, but here, for just $100 per year, anything goes. That is not a reasonable expectation for service in my opinion. There is some anecdotal evidence that non-residents from surrounding communities are dumping large items on our streets because they save money, and know we pick it up. That costs the city money beyond even what we residents demand, though it’s hard to know by how much. Even though I love the convenience of full trash pickup and have taken advantage of it every single time I’ve moved, I knew that it was a matter of time before it was deemed untenable. I think now is that time.

Far from a pay-for-throw system, which I think we should seriously consider, merely having to buy stickers for large bulky items instead of getting them taken away free (or rather, as part of the basic fee) would go a ways towards closing the gap, and might be a good first step to bringing our trash services in line to reasonable expectations.

Then there’s that recycling situation. Because there’s not enough buy-in from residents on recycling, the program costs the city instead of saves it money. There are so many great ideas for improving participation, and most don’t require too much money. A slate of volunteers, maybe a twice-yearly “Recycling Day” wherein the volunteers and city employees make themselves available in various neighborhoods to give out the bins and educate residents on what can and cannot be recycled would be a start. A couple of tens of thousands in investment for an outreach program could yield hundreds of thousands in savings in our trash services. I bet there’s even a state or federal grant to run such a program.

You can’t talk upping the recycling participation, though, until you at least consider pay-for-throw, or even just limitations on the number of trash bags per family per week. In pay-for-throw, residents would have to buy special bags for a little more than they are paying for generic ones, in order for their trash to be taken away. Those bags would be available at every grocery store and other retail locations in the area. The incentive to recycle then becomes a monetary one, as families try to decrease their waste stream and spend less on the special bags

You could also mandate recycling that way. In some pay-for-throw programs, those specially-bought bags are clear, so the trash inside is visible to the sanitation worker. With clear bags, the sanitation workers could spot recyclables in the trash and refuse to pick up that bag, leaving a note indicating why the bag was refused. Personally, I’m all for this method. The city saves tons of money, and maybe we obtain a recycling participation rate to be envied the world over.

What you would then do is reduce or eliminate the yearly fee in favor of the per-bag and per-bulky-item prices we would pay. An adept recycler might be able to actually make out ahead of the deal, using less than $100 per year in trash bags and stickers. My household, with recycling and composting, averages maybe a bag a week. At, say, a $1 a bag, that’s certainly less than 100 bags a year, while the city makes up the difference by making money on the amount of recyclables I’ve not thrown in the trash. You can also reduce your waste stream by buying food or items that are not overpackaged, using canvass bags for all your shopping, not just groceries, giving away clothing and goods that are still serviceable, among other trash-saving tips.

Imagine how exciting it would be if we just took some time to redesign how we live, just a little bit.

[Filed under Local politics, Environment] [link]

19 Responses to “Trash Deficit Is Half of City’s Deficit”

Mimi Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
If this is the case, that is our property tax continues to pay for trash pick-up, those of us who live in Lowell’s dozens of condo complexes (1,200 units) or those entities that own large rental properties are are going to have serious legal issues with the City.

There is a City ordinance that prevents the City from picking up trash or recyclable material from any complex that has six or more units. Why should we pay and not receive that service, especially when we have so many people not willing to recycle?
Lynne Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Mimi, that’s a great point, because the deficit, I assume, IS made up from general receipts every year.

I am wholeheartedly for a pay-for-throw program to be implemented. I know there will be screaming, there will be yelling, there will be moaning and groaning, but seriously, you should pay for what you throw out. If you are smart, you can reduce your trash stream and save money!

It’s using those “free market” forces the libertarians tout so much (ie, your wallet) to incentivize people to do the right thing. Of course, paying for trash service at all isn’t very libertarian, if they were in charge we’d all have to drive it somewhere, or start landfills in our back yards…
Vince Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Mimi, isn’t the fee is the same for 1-6 unit buildings regardless of how many units??? Landlords should pay for how many units they have.

Also, I have had 3 recycling bins stolen from me this year already. Does this happen to other people? That’s one reason I don’t recycle as much… The last one didn’t even last one week.
joe Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
It should be made clear that, under pay-as-you-throw, the cost of the special bags replaces (some or all of) the trash fee, not in addition to that fee.

We should empower city residents to reduce their own trash disposal costs.
Lynne Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Hmm, I’ve never had mine stolen, and I’ve lived in three different areas of the city. Wonder why yours does?

Maybe if they were more commonly available and everyone had one on the street, no one would be taking them? Or are people taking them for reasons other than bringing them back to their place and recycling?

One thing I do not know is if the residents who live in condos have to pay the trash fee. Do they? (If they do, that’s really unfair.)
Magnolia Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
In looking around my neighborhood, I have relized that several of my neighbors do not recycle either through ignorance or laziness. Doesn’t Tyngsborough have an “enforcer” of sorts that check neighborhoods from time to time and then fine those who do not recycle?
Magnolia Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
In looking around my neighborhood, I have relized that several of my neighbors do not recycle either through ignorance or laziness. Doesn’t Tyngsborough have an “enforcer” of sorts who checks neighborhoods from time to time and then fine those who do not recycle? I live in the Higlands and and have my bin stolen twice; once by someone who actually came inside my fence and dumped out the things in it before they took it. It would also help if the neighbors across the street did not bag their construction /destruction debris and put it out in large green bags ( about 50in a matter of 3 weeks ) . It was obvious what it was - but the haulers picked it up anyway.
Josh Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Holy crap…

I agree.
Jay Booth Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Yeah we had an intern that did that in Tyngsboro — no fines though, just polite letters. It worked, actually, recycling went up quite a bit during her tenure, saving us I believe more than we paid her.

And here’s the thing with Trash fees, Lynne… they’re even more regressive than the property tax. $100 to the paupers and the rich. Pay as you throw could be a good way to encourage recycling if implemented right but it’s all in the details, if administrative overhead for the program is too high it’s not much of a gain to the city financially, may as well just actually increase taxes and keep 100% of it with zero overhead. In Tyngsboro I was opposed to both on principle, even though pay as you throw could be a good program it wouldn’t have been right to vote it in with a constituency that slaughtered 2 overrides by 3:1 in the last 3 years. End-run around Prop 2 1/2. That logic doesn’t really apply to Lowell because I Lowell’s under their 2 1/2 cap already, but that’s why I say if you need to raise more revenue from taxpayers, just raise the property taxes by a point, it’s simpler, more efficient and (slightly) more progressive.

… And that’ll be my last LiL post as a sitting Selectman. Done at 8pm tonight when the voting’s over… or technically whenever the new guy/gal is sworn in tomorrow I guess. I gotta think of a silly nickname and triple my sarcasm and profanity levels.
Anonymous Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
# Vince Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 12:54 pm

Mimi, isn’t the fee is the same for 1-6 unit buildings regardless of how many units??? Landlords should pay for how many units they have.

Also, I have had 3 recycling bins stolen from me this year already. Does this happen to other people? That’s one reason I don’t recycle as much… The last one didn’t even last one week.

The trash fee is per housing unit not building. A two family pays 2 fees, a three family pays three. By the way, swing by my house and grab my recycling bin I never use it.
Anonymous Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
“no other local community just picks up everything people put out.” This is so true. I recently had a company come and talk to my company about a “small” bag like dumpster that could be used for cleaning out garages etc.. The first thought I had was who would need this product to clean out a garage? My co-workers said “well you can’t put a garage worth of stuff out to the trash”. I said you can in Lowell and they said “when is your trash day”? (a joke) In the past when I moved we put out about 10 trash bags, a sofa, chair, and washing machine(prior to knowing about the wish project) It was “legal”.
….gone on trash day…. I have brought it up in the past about neighbors throwing out their adult childrens trash, friends that bring their trash to relatives in NH with a dump pass, etc. and it seems that the trash flows to the free towns and cities. I would gladly go around and deliver recycle bins as I have offered in the past and I think this is half the battle. I do think a reasonable amount needs to be included in trash pick up maybe 2-3 bags per week as some of us will not go as far as cloth diapers. I would discourage raising property taxes as many Lowell residents were over assesed last year and did not protest it and a tax increase may end up being regressive as abatements will increase. We did not protest due to extreme laziness and no return call from the assesors office. With a 2.5% tax increase I will be figuring out that abatement next year. My property taxes went up 11% from 2006 to 2007 and 28% from 2007 to 2008. I laugh when Lowell CM. says that we did not have a property tax rate increase last year. I can show you my cancelled checks that we truely had an increase.
Victoria Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 6:52 am
I work downtown and we have no recycling in our building - not sure any of the office buildings do recycling. Why does the city have an ordinance against picking up trash in the downtown? Wouldn’t it be better to include everyone and charge a fee according to number of units or square feet?
Shawn Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 8:00 am
Dracut allows one large item per week at no additional charge.

When you have two or three to get rid of, you just ask your neighbors and spread it around.

Recycling is a hastle.. I do collect cans, cardboard and newspapers, but I don’t have the time or energy to figure out the rest of it.

And if you put it out the night before.. the night crawlers come along and make a mess of the whole thing picking out the cans.

Pay-per-bag would create incredible blight in Lowell. Find the list of abandoned/foreclosed homes and you would have the list of new trash piles that would appear within months.
tim Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Shawn - no plastics? It’s really not that difficult or much of a hassle. ALL plastics are now recycled, even if it doesn’t have the symbol. Takes a couple seconds to give it a quick rinse if needed and toss it in a different bin than the trash.

You don’t need to sort (except for paper). Really, not much work at all, it’s just a matter of making it a habit.
Lynne Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
OMG recycling is NOT a hassle - especially in Lowell, where all plastic numbers 1-7, glass, and cans can be thrown in. Paper is as easy. Every year, we get in the mail a very clear, easy to understand postcard from the city outlining what we can recycle. It’s a no brainer. Just put a second’s worth of thought into it.

I also think you’re putting up a straw man with the “create incredible blight” scenario. There’s nothing to base that on but your opinion.
joe Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
There have been some places that have seen an increase in dumping after adopting pay-as-you-throw. It’s not an insolvable problem, though.
Shawn Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
If you’ve lived around here for a while, you would know of the 1 year that Chelmsford tried it..

Trash everywhere, elderly hoarded it in their homes to the point where they became firetraps and dangerous for fire fighters to enter.

Bags of trash were in the woods everywhere, town and park dumpsters, business dumpsters…

Fran could fill us in.
Shawn Says:
May 14th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Oh, we do have a bin in the kitchen that we throw all drinking bottles and cans into (thats what I meant by cans), then once a week we put it all out for the night crawlers to pick at.
Lynne Says:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Then we should improve on whatever they did, learn what they did wrong, not dismiss it out of hand. Plenty of communities do just fine with it.

May 13, 2008

Trash Deficit Is Half of City’s Deficit

19 Responses to “Trash Deficit Is Half of City’s Deficit”

Leave a Reply

LeftinLowell Tweets

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

Other:

Email us!

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Media in Lowell

Media in MA

Other Daily Reads

Politics Online

Progressive Local Orgs

Snark and politics

The Arts in Lowell

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr				Jun »
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31