Pay As You Throw is Coming to Lowell
Due to some technical difficulties, last night’s City Council meeting was not broadcast on Lowell Telecommunications Corporation (LTC) Channel 10. So many Lowellians who wanted to watch the discussion on “trash pickup” did not have the opportunity.
But do not worry. LTC’s web site already has posted the streaming video and there are numerous opportunities to watch the replays starting tonight on Channel 10:
Wednesday, Sept. 10, 11 p.m. [for insomniacs 
]
Friday, Sept. 12, 10 a.m.
Saturday, Sept. 13, 8 p.m.
Sunday, Sept. 14, 8 p.m.
Wednesday, Sept. 17, 3 p. m.
Wednesday, Sept. 17, 11 p.m.
Friday, Sept. 19, 8 p.m.
Saturday, Sept. 20, 10 a.m.
Sunday, Sept 21, 8 p.m.
Jennifer Meyers article in today’s Sun has the details of the discussion and the CC vote which “approved increasing the annual trash collection fee from $100 to $125 per household, with a fee of $1.50 per trash bag above what fits into a 64-gallon barrel.” The vote passed 6-1; CC Bill Martin voted against it. Meyers reports that “Councilor Bill Martin was the lone vote in opposition, saying he was not as optimistic as his colleagues that the program will be a success.”
Of course this new ordinance does not apply to non-condo owners or apartments with six units or more.
Today, on his blog City Manger Bernie Lynch has posted on the implementation of the new ordinance. According to the CM, “he success of this program hinges largely on two things; active participation from our residents and enforcement by the City.”
And for those of you who preferred to have your information delivered in compact form, CM Lynch links to the PowerPoint presentation he made last night.
The drafting and passing of this ordinance was a joint effort between the Administration, the City Council and concerned citizens but a special recognition should be given to CCs J. Milinazzo and K. Broderick who started it all back in February 2007, when they offered a joint motion asking the CM “to.investigate pros/cons of “pay as you throw” trash collection program.”
September 11th, 2008 at 7:48 am
I recycle every week and think that more people should but it is unfair to charge us 25% more for trash pickup and set a limit on how much we can put out. How do I know that my neighbors won’t be dumping their trash in front of my house? Anyone know how much it is costing us to supply every house in Lowell with the new trash barrel?
September 11th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Are you throwing out more than 64gal a week? If you are, that’s a lot of trash, sorry, and you are costing the system more than I, who throw out maybe one regular kitchen bag a week, due to my composting (no nonmeat food trash goes into my bin) and serious paper recycling (I believe that taking the time to put the chipboard stuff like cereal boxes saves me like 20-30% of my trash space).
If your neighbors put trash in front of your house, then call the police, make a report. But it’s highly unlikely to happen.
Personally, I like the system we had in Dover NH better - every trash bag cost like $.99, and no one needed a special barrel. I don’t know if there was a trash fee, as we were renters, but I imagine it was pretty low because every bag was in effect paying for itself as you went.
But the new trash barrels actually do save cost in the long run, as they standardize trash pickup with the ability of the barrel to be put into the lift. Meaning it takes a lot less time (and less idling of the truck I imagine, saving gas) to pick up trash. What you lose in initial cost (and ongoing cost for lost/stolen barrels or new households) is paid for in efficiency over the long run.
If the new trash barrels looked like they were going to be a net cost, I’m certain that Bernie wouldn’t have looked twice at them.
It’s time to stop whining and actually have the cost to use reflect the service. We were getting a free ride - and we had a budget deficit because of it.
And BTW, there is NOT a limit - it’s $1.50 to put out more. I plan to buy a set of the special tags or bags that will be needed just to have them on hand, but I will likely not need them often. If you wind up needing them more often, maybe you need to evaluate your trash stream.
For instance, are you still getting your groceries or retail shopping in plastic bags and then throwing them out at home? Bring your own reusable canvas bags and you’ll save room in your trash (and the landfill). I NEVER - repeat - NEVER get a bag from a retail outlet. Either what I’m buying doesn’t need a bag (if it’s one or two items) or I bring my own. That includes (the rare) instances I go clothing shopping. Who needs plastic bags?
September 11th, 2008 at 10:19 am
I’m not a fan of pay-as-you-go as a rule for making tax policies. Everything would suck really bad if that were the case, just think about it.
I use those left over plastic grocery bags to pick up my dog’s mess. I’m not going to want to forgoe that to pay for poopoo bags, especially if I’m paying more for trash removal. Earth wouldn’t have had any of these problems if we all instated a 2-child policy 2 thousand years ago. Man, if only I got to make all the rules…..
September 11th, 2008 at 10:42 am
“PATG” in this case, however, is to incentivize us to recycle and reduce the waste stream, saving us money and the environment at the same time. When incentives need to be in place, it’s perfectly justifiable to make people bear the costs of their habits. After all, we were already paying for it - in a yearly fee - but it wasn’t a responsible system because there was a deficit and a disincentive to be responsible. “Just put it all on the curb,” says we with our pick-it-all-up system, “don’t worry about where it goes or how much it costs. We don’t care!”
Secondarily, I would say that a grocery-sized plastic bag is more bag than you need to pick up dog poop, and this is a prime example of being wasteful. If it were me, I would want to find a more sustainable way to do it, and it would like involve me buying biodegradable, smaller plastic bags to do this chore. Because every plastic bag I throw away makes me shudder, knowing where it goes, and how we got it in the first place (oil-based plastics) and how much energy it takes to make just one bag.
I’d bear the cost because look, it’s a small sacrifice. Compared to what I am asking society to sacrifice for me every time I buy something with too much packaging or am wasteful with resources.
September 11th, 2008 at 10:54 am
I look at it this way, I’m not crapping out 3,4,5,6,7 etc. kids. People need to use better birth control and all the traffic, waste, pollution, crime, and poverty in the world would be gone. I’m doing my part, by not adding a whole gaggle of new “consumers” to the herd.
Have 1 kid peopel, if you really think it’s unfair and lonely to your spawn then have 2 if you must!! But why for the love of Pete add more people to Earth than that!!??
ZPG for life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 11th, 2008 at 11:15 am
On behalf of the City Manager’s Office, I wanted to let interested readers know that links to the Solid Waste Ordinance and a Matrix that highlights the changes to the ordinance are now embedded in the “Talkin’ Trash” blog post on the Manager’s blog site. Thanks for the discussion. We are very interested in hearing what residents think about this.
September 11th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Peter writes:
“I use those left over plastic grocery bags to pick up my dog’s mess. I’m not going to want to forgoe that to pay for poopoo bags, especially if I’m paying more for trash removal.”
A couple of suggestion: Try BioBags (http://www.biobagusa.com/biobag_dog.htm) — they’re a great alternative to hermetically sealed dog $#!* and not ungodly expensive. Most supermarkets offer reusable tote bags, so you don’t have to use those plastic bags anyway.
Man, I’d hate to meet your dog if he’s making a significant contribution to the 64 gal trash limit each week! What on Easth are you feeding him?
September 11th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Mostly chili and corn, why?
September 11th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
You people can’t be serious,with four children keeping trash to a minimum will be nothing more than a chore,between eating at home and making school lunches as well as disposing of dirty diapers and having those extra people over that are “just visiting” will fill up my 64 gallon container weekly,nevermind if I clean the house and have to get rid of vaccuum bags or mop heads of change a doormat, a small area rug, of even entertain a family, or have someone over for a sporting event.How about Thanksgiving, Christmas, Birthdays, etc.. Nevermind doing a small home project like sheetrocking,changing a door, or even cleaning out the basement or attic-how about missing a thrash day,God forbid I do that. We already recycle four containers a week. This plan is ludicrous,but if the city manager and our united city council agree that it’s ok, it must be. Sorry Lynne but your missing the boat on this one.
September 11th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
fred b: No, you think I am missing the boat on this one. You are a minority, I believe.
Is it really too much to ask that everyone do their level best to actually lower their waste stream? In every other town around here, the trash costs more to haul away than it has here. Honey, we were spoiled. We were lucky. We were in deficit - this program was not being paid for fairly.
Invest in a trash compactor, you’ll fit 4 kids’ waste and plenty of diapers into your trash. Hey! Here’s one for you - use reusable cloth diapers, or find better, more bio-friendly ones. Stop bemoaning the fact that you’re no longer getting a free ride. You’re lucky you got that free ride as long as you have.
And in fact, if you need the extra space to throw out more junk, then you merely have to pay $1.50/bag. This isn’t asking much. In other towns, PAYT means paying for EVERY bag. Or higher yearly fees. Or both. This is a compromise solution that takes into account that people are not going to want to switch to pure PAYT, while still incentivizing us to look at our waste habits and try to do better with recycling and reducing our use.
And take a look at a 64-gallon barrel, folks. (The middle one in that picture.) That is double your average trash barrel, so it’s like having two barrels you can fill every week. Since I’ve gotten our waste down to less than a bag a week with two people in my household, you could easily fit 6 people’s trash in two whole barrels’ worth of space (especially with a compactor) if you just get yourself some better waste habits.
September 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
lynne, how many children do you have? Are all the people in your home?reducing trash size on their own? Am I supposed to play in the trash because the city tells me to? How about the upwards of $4000 I pay in city taxes? is that the free ride your reffering to?Trash compacter I’m glad you have the extra money and space but I don’t,same goes for your g
great diaper service idea.
Lynne, how about all the people that live in three and four family homes that aren’t in the privately owned homes that we have the blessing of,they may not give a hoot about the trash,what’s up with that,I know the landlords are to baby sit them as well.WRONG!
September 11th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Lynne -
I love ya, babe, but you are taking a very high-brow approach to this. That is, you are assuming that because you have some disposable income, so does everyone else.
Cost -
Think of the people who can’t afford a compactor. Think of the fact that reusable grocery totes cost extra money that people on food stamps might not have. Think of the fact that you are now adding to both the tax bill and the (new) per-bag cost for families that might be trying to determine whether to heat their home or buy their medication this winter. Although the cost is insignificant to you, there are many people who literally are counting every penny, and this cost DOES make a difference to them.
Waste reduction -
I’ve been in households with multiple children - regardless of how careful you might try to be with recycling and being non-wasteful, the fact remains that kids seem to produce more trash than adults, and 4 people produce more waste than 2. And, as someone pointed out, Thanksgiving gatherings produce more waste than a non-holiday week. Although some people can afford to pay extra for the “privilege” of visiting with family, some can’t. Do we now have to ask people to bring an extra dollar to put into the “trash bag coffer” when we invite them to dinner (especially a big family dinner, which is perhaps potluck to begin with, due to cost)? In terms of composting, not everyone has space or land or even the time to compost, and/or to do it effectively, and/or to know what to do with the product.
Perhaps I’m citing some extreme examples. But what each household sees in their checkbook is an increase in their costs, and it’s completely disrespectful to brush that aside like it doesn’t matter.
I appreciate the reasons and the compromise behind the new plan. My own house uses reusable bags and biodegradable doggie-poop bags, and we buy organic, local food as much as we can. But these things DO cost money. And I can’t judge anyone for putting food (of any sort) or heat or clothes or a mortgage payment or medicine as a higher priority than paying for getting rid of trash.
And it’s not fair of you to judge them for being wasteful without visiting their home, or for raising their kids differently than you would do (cloth diapers). Good for you for spending time and money to reduce the waste you and your hubby put out. Not everyone has that luxury.
September 11th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
I watched the City Council meeting and I was surprised (shocked even) by one resident’s comment. He was very, very up upset that the fee increase wasn’t higher! He pointed out that despite the increase to the fee there is still going to be a deficit, smaller but still a deficit. True, but this is the really important part, he went on to say that this deficit is taking away from other services; our schools, public works, infrastructure improvements public safety. And this is my comment: We need to take personal responsibility by decreasing the amount that goes into the waste stream. Lynne made the point that we’ve had a free ride, but when you think about it in the context of where the taxpayer money going to pay for trash pickup could be going, is it really free? This system is used successfully around the country, in cities similiar demographically. Worcester is close to home and an excellent example. They too have tight neighborhoods, multifamilies, and poverty and yet they are making it work. Why shouldn’t we be able to do the same?
September 11th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
We pay one way or the other (taxes or fees), so the difference is that when the cost is tied more directly to the action, we should all become more efficient in reducing waste. Lynne has suggested some ways to achieve that, although the idea of a trash compacter may not be a good one. It may get help get more trash into a barrel, but since the disposal cost is based on weight, it will do nothing to reduce those costs. Since we all have several months to prepare for the change, maybe we could create a list of ways to better reduce our waste, and although they may not all work for everybody, everybody should find something that they can use.
Let’s take the holiday problem - not only do we create more waste, we have an extra day in that trash collection week. But the following week is then shorter, so we could store some of the excess (clean) waste from the holiday week and then add it into the following week’s disposal.
And we could push the problem back, rather than trying to find better ways to dispose of it, find better ways to buy things such that they don’t bring so much waste into our households (for example, Lynne’s shopping bag approach).
Maybe a good place to start is for each person to pay attention to what is being thrown into our waste disposal, and then ask the question “how can I reduce that?”.
September 11th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
fred b,
I think you need to remember that the option to this plan was to go to a $300 trash fee. That means that with the current proposed fee of $125 you would pay $175 more divided by 52 weeks equalling about 3.4 bags you could buy per week and still be paying less. Take a couple of trash barrels, go to the city hall neighborhood services and grab some recycling stickers, and put them next to your back door and use them just like you do trash. We can not believe now that after we throw stuff out into our can/plastic barrel, and into our paper barrel that we have little waste left. (we have 2 small children with diapers, snack wrappers etc. and never fill more than two trash bags) So you get about 4 bags that you fit in the barrel and 3 more that you can buy (7) trashbags and you would still be better off with this system then with a set $300 fee.
September 12th, 2008 at 12:39 am
My family of three recycles each week, and we typically fill a 20 gallon trash barrel about 2/3 of the way - and that includes a week’s worth of dirty diapers. And I don’t compost or have have a compactor.
I have no idea how people can complain that a 64 gallon barrel isn’t enough.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:37 am
Fred b
am I supposed to feel bad for you because you chose to crap out 4 kids? YOU’RE the problem. what makes your genes so G.D. special? Just think, what would happen to the population and the earth if everybody had 4 kids. People like you make me…..
September 12th, 2008 at 7:55 am
I hope the city plans to market the new program. There are a lot non English speaking households in the city who are not going to understand what is going on. The recycling coordinator should go into the schools and get the kids psyched up about recycling then they can teach the parents. That is how I got my mom to recycle (many years ago)
September 12th, 2008 at 8:40 am
“We pay one way or the other (taxes or fees), so the difference is that when the cost is tied more directly to the action, we should all become more efficient in reducing waste.”
waittilnextyr is spot on with this statement. We will pay no matter what. I would rather be given the option to recycle and save myself a buck and the environment.
“am I supposed to feel bad for you because you chose to crap out 4 kids”
Peter you are way overboard with this statement. If you want to chant no more than 2 kids for the environment, you should do your part and not use grocery store bags to pick up dog poop. It is real hypocritical to say that because people have too many kids you cant pollute at will.
September 12th, 2008 at 8:42 am
FYI - I actually don’t have much of a disposable income at this point. I sympathize with the tough situation people are in.
I have freecycled and craigslisted my way into most of the work I’ve been doing at my home (interior and exterior). You’d be surprised at how much stuff there is out there - for free or really cheap. For instance I bet if you tried you could get/make a compost pile for little or no money, find a trash compactor someone wants to get rid of, and to be honest, changing wasteful habits is even easier - just making sure all the packing our food comes with is recycled as much as it can be is probably 10% of your waste stream right there. (Recycling food containers, and making sure to recycle the chipboard packaging in the paper recycling.)
The point is, it can be done if people stop talking about it and just DO some simple things in their own lives to stop wasting so much crap. (The reusable grocery bag thing alone, something that costs MAYbe $10-30 for canvas bags that last years, they’re wicked cheap, or hey, just Freecycle or whatever and get some free if you’re really low on money, that alone will reduce a huge load in a household that is buying $300 in groceries - 12-25 plastic bags’ worth - every week!)
Peter, be nice please. Honestly. I am not above banning you for being that crass and for your personal attack.
kpem: thanks for the math, and you’re right.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:03 am
by the way fred b, if you read any of my comments, you’ll note I said we are a two person household. That pretty much rules out kids, since Mr. Lynne posts on here frequent and as far as I know, we’re still married.
Play in the trash?? Oh my god. You know what? If you aren’t willing to do your part to take five seconds to put the frozen fish-stick cardboard box in the paper recycling and the inner packing that has a recycling number on it into the (free) recycle bin, I can’t help you. Pay for your extra trash bags.
As to renters, well, gee, who do you think is going to be filling the 64-gal trash bins? The landlords? Hardly. The residents who need to put out more trash than their weekly barrel can fit will have to buy the $1.50 tags. This was the system put into place in Dover, NH when my husband and I rented there, and we did juuuuuuuust fine, as did our neighbors. A lot of whom were, by the way, irresponsible college students. If a bunch of partying students can figure out how to recycle their beer bottles and buy special trash bags (Dover was a completely pay-as-you-throw system, ALL trash bags cost money), then you can too. Or, you can pay for the extra bags a week. Either way, at least you are bearing your fair share of the burden, as we all will. Though I disagree with how Peter has said it (and the next comment from him like that will get him banned, unfortunately), YOU are the one who has four kids - you had to know that they would cost more than 3, or 2, or none. Take some personal responsibility, man. They make more mess. You want everyone else to clean it up, for free?
As for the idea that this will make Lowell a trash-dumping city (what, you don’t think we already are?? take a look around!) anyone who leaves trash lying around their property will be cited, like any other ordinance in the city.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Listen Kpem, if that’s even your real name. Technicallys I AM reducing AND recycling these effing bags. The multiple offspring these people spawn and their spawn spawn and their spawn spawn will do exponentially more damage to the environment. It’s literally true! Give me a break.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
peter, If I have four children and you consider that a problem,that’s too bad for you ’cause it’s more of a blessing than sitting online all and cutting people up for being upstanding citizen raising a family.
Lynne, did you look at CL’s post it made a lot of sense.I gathered you only had you and your husband, but still needed to give you the benifit of the doubt-big mistake.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
The real issue here is this trash ordinance going to benefit the city?With over 120,000 people in it,this will be a difficult task to get the message across to all the non english speakers,that to limit their trash output and use recycling bins to separate it will be a difficult task especially considering that there is very limited space to store their bins, keep their bins theirs and not having someone dump their trash in it cause they really don’t care.College students can be educated a lot easier than others,don’t you think? The trash is going to strewn with limited arranging thererfore, the mess begins. Is there not another idea that can get people to recycle?your full of them do you think you can come up with one.Lynne, Im sorry to say that frozen items such as fishticks are not served in my home and if they were I’m sure there would have to be more than one package.Many people in this city either don’t read or can’t, this is nothing more than a can of worms.peter,nothing else to do, try counting all the money you saved by not having any children.
September 13th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Peter: knock it off. Really. Judge not lest ye be judged. There’s legitimacy in questioning whether it’s a great idea to overpopulate but you’ve made it a personal judgment on one particular person and you need to tone it down. This is your last warning. Next time you will be banned. Unfortunate because I think you’ve had other valuable contributions here.
Fred: just because we’ve got challenges in getting the word out because our city includes immigrants, we can’t solve this problem? You should still get a free ride? Or we should start charging $350/year for the trash fee instead of $125? That’s as much of a hardship to a poor family as buying $1.50 trash bags, it solves nothing. Therefore, giving people - poor or rich - the opportunity to SAVE money on their waste fees by incentivizing them to reduce their waste is a far better solution than fixing the waste deficit by merely charging everyone more than double the current cost.
Worcester has a minority population too, and they implemented this system. Are we no better than they?
You haven’t read my comments at ALL, fred. Did I not make it clear that we do not have disposable income, and we know what it’s like not to have money? ALL the stuff I have done to reduce my waste stream, fred, have been FREE or really really cheap (the most expensive was my partially-subsidized compost bin, but you can build those even cheaper or for free with lumber scraps and cheap fencing).
So what, you can’t take the time to do the simple things that could reduce your waste into one 64-gal can a week (keeping in mind that a 64-gal is pretty damn big and my househole, as two people, maybe will use a fourth of that space, and you only have 3 times the household)? Well, that’s you not taking responsibility for your own actions. So then, pay for the extra bags. That’s an option for you not going and doing the things that my husband and I have done to reduce our waste. But at least you are made responsible for your own cost to the city for your lack of personal responsibility, instead of making us all pay for it. Again, the current system of “dump it all” was a free ride, and that was budgetarily unsustainable. Would you have the city go into deficit to protect your free ride? That’s hardly responsible or good governance.
September 13th, 2008 at 11:37 am
ok, lynne your website you win.Let’s wait and see.
September 14th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“ok, lynne your website you win.Let’s wait and see”
It is not about it being her website. It is about just being lazy. This is not some massive amount of work. I think it is up to you how many children you have but do you really want to leave them a legacy of pollution? Everything you throw out has to go somewhere. Do you ever wonder where it ends up?
September 15th, 2008 at 7:43 am
kpem, I am constantly training my older children and my younger ones will be trained as well.Who will train the rest of the city?That is where the problem will lie,in the neighborhoods where recycling and trash are’nt important, where getting by to the next day or week is.We’ll see.
September 15th, 2008 at 9:52 am
As kpem says, it’s not about winning. But you were being a little disingenuous, and also, ignoring the things I was writing. So I pointed them out.
If you can’t see the logic of what I post that’s not my doing. *shrug*
September 15th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
fred b,
No I do not think there is another way to get people to recycle other then limiting trash. If your argument is that their needs to be a serious educational program that goes along with this I would agree completely. Maybe the city could have volunteers at the local parks on some weekends to hand out bins and stickers, explain to non-readers, and hand out literature with multiple languages on it. Would you be there to volunteer? It is really not fair to say that “other” people just won’t get it.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Well I’m a homeowner in Lowell and this is the first I heard of this. When do they plan on letting us little people know? I’m glad all of you are so up on city goings on but the rest of us are just busy trying to survive. Please do not tell me to get the sun if I want to know what’s going on in Lowell. I should not have to buy a newspaper to know about important changes. So when is this going to happen and really when do they plan on letting the public know?