We have grave reservations about charging Peorians a fee for garbage pick-up, and we think City Council members should, too.
Non-payment will be a problem. Littering will increase. So will illegal dumping: on county roads, in commercial Dumpsters, even on city streets and parking lots. Garbage very possibly will accumulate, indoors, out of sight of inspectors…. Peoria will be a dirtier city if garbage isn’t picked up at every home, every week. It will be a dirtier city if streets and gullies become dumping grounds for people who quit paying their trash collector.
While these dire warnings may sound like they just came out of today’s paper, they didn’t. They were published in the Journal Star on June 24, 2003. The reason? Peoria was considering implementing a $6 per month garbage fee.
I wonder if anyone had the foresight to quantify how much illegal dumping there was before the fee went into effect so we can compare it to how much there is now. That might give us an accurate picture of how much there will be if Peoria goes to some sort of “pay as your throw” system next year. While there have been reports of illegal dumping since the garbage fee went into effect (one even appeared on this blog), it doesn’t appear to be the widespread plague of filth we were warned would happen.
I can’t help but think that maybe — just maybe — concerns about “pay as your throw” causing Peoria to degenerate into some kind of Lord of the Flies scenario might be similarly overstated. Nevertheless, I understand the drawbacks — specifically, the “pay” part of the proposal.
But the truth is that you’re going to pay no matter what. It’s not a matter of paying or not paying; it’s just a matter of how you’ll pay. If it’s not “pay as your throw,” how shall we pay for it? Raise property taxes? Sales taxes? The garbage fee? Pick your poison. Costs are going to go up even if we didn’t change a thing. Adding recycling is going to raise costs more. Property taxes would be a progressive way to pay for it; raising the garbage fee would be regressive. Putting the extra fee on the user would hit large families pretty hard, and in that sense could also be seen as regressive. Raising the sales tax… well… we have to save that for necessities like museums, civic centers, and hotels….
There are no easy answers, only more questions. But I doubt “pay as you throw,” if ultimately adopted, would turn Peoria residences into mini-landfills. Whatever the reason is for rejecting “pay as your throw,” it shouldn’t be that.
There’s no incentive to illegally dump right now. I think everybody gets charged the same regardless of how much or little you put at the curb. If there was a way to get around that $6 charge on a person’s water bill by having no garbage at the curb, then the illegal dumping would have started becoming an option for some.
When I first bought a house in Peoria, I didn’t know that garbage pickup was included in the property taxes. I was single and didn’t produce much garbage. I thought I was beating the system by taking my trash to the nearby apartment complex that had a dumpster out of site. It wasn’t until my neighbor informed about it already being paided for that I put my trash at the curb.
It sure will not make it any cleaner.
As one that rents dumpsters for commercial properties I think pay as your throw could be a big headache for property owners. People already cruise around looking for commercial dumpsters to throw stuff in. I can only imagine the problem if this plan was given the green light.
sanitation, along with police and fire, are the most basic of city services. You don’t need the city in the hotel business or the civic center business, or any of a number of other frivolities, but if you can’t provide sanitation, then close it down, folks. Will Peoria instantly become a third-world-like garbage dump? No. But, gradually, it will get worse and worse.
I was shocked when, after purchasing my home and beginning rehabilitation to it, to see how many people illegally throw their stuff in your commercially rented dumpster. People would just pull up to it, middle of the day, and throw their junk in it. The only reason I didn’t explode with anger is because just as many people came by and pulled out scrap metal and lumber.
Still though, it was a rude awakening.
John,
Another reason for concealed carry!
Another reason for concealed carry!
This comment would also be appropriate in the *businesses over-taxing* thread.
Hah! JUST KIDDING!! 😉
CJ, I’m with Clayton. The two systems – pay-as-you-throw and the garbage fee – are totally different. If you don’t pay your garbage fee on the water bill, they still pick up your trash (you may not have any water, though).
Is there garbage pick-up on vacant lots/land?
Karrie,
How can a vacant land pick up a container and lug it to the curb?
How can a vacant lot fill a container for that fact?
PC: Have you ever owned vacant lots/land in Peoria? People use them for dumping grounds. Just wondering if there is garbage pick-up at vacant lots? Perhaps you could have water on a vacant lot and thereby have garbage pick-up because you can be billed $6.00 on your water bill? Just asking.
Karrie,
I do not own vacant land or lots in the COP. If some person or entity owns a vacant lot and someone else uses it for a land fill I would conclude that the owner has the responsibility to clean up the lot/vacant land. If it had waterservice to the lot i.e. a house used to occupy it and was demolished and removed, the service is more than likely to be capped or shut off at the street junction with the lot service line.
Maybe you could put in a drinking fountain or a bird bath if the water is present and ask the city to collect. But the owner has to load the trash and drag to the curb, the lot is unable to do it by itself.
The owner could just take the trash to the county land fill – one free load a week, after all county services are part of the county tax.
PC — Karrie asked, “Is there garbage pick-up on vacant lots/land?” Even with your hyper-literalist reading of everything, there’s no grammatical way to construe that question as implying the vacant lot or land picks up the garbage. It says “on vacant lots/land” — “on” being a preposition indicating location of the garbage pick-up.
There was nothing grammatically wrong with her wording. We all (including you) knew what she meant. You’re just being obtuse.
CJ: Thanks! 🙂
Couple things…
1. The biggest difference between now and then (adding the $6 dollar “garbage” fee that was actually to pay for police services not garbage) is that along with pay as you throw garbage prices, we would have RECYCLING for every household “free” (paid by our taxes). Also the media is the only one who’s really suggested charging for every bag of garbage. GWSG is advocating for PAYT, yes, but also for a minimum level of garbage to be included “free” (paid through property taxes) and then people who don’t bother to recycle, pay for the excess.
2. Other cities have found it easy to identify illegally dumped garbage’s owner and fine them. Cameras set up in popular dumping hot spots pay for themselves both in fines and effectiveness in stopping the dumping quickly.
3. Other cities just like us have said “it’s not a problem”
4. The EPA reports 90-98% of residents with a pay as you throw program actually prefer it after implementation.
5. Personally I’d like to see the PAYT option suggested by the waste haulers to include a 32 gallon garbage cart free. Then people can either pay for an extra cart or a larger cart size via monthly billing or buy a sticker for the occasional extra bag of garbage over their “free” amount. It’s a lot easier to just pay the monthly bill than find places every week to illegally dump. Plus so much of a households garbage could be recycled