• Many unanswered recycling, trash questions • We already pay for trash collection Many unanswered recycling, trash questions The following written and oral observations and questions were given to our County Council regarding bill #2367, the new waste-disposal program —
• Many unanswered recycling, trash questions •
We already pay for trash collection
Many unanswered recycling, trash questions
The following written and oral observations and questions were given to our County Council regarding bill #2367, the new waste-disposal program — with no response from them:
As some members of this council alluded to in a previous meeting, if our property taxes are now paying for our waste pick up, then if we are adding a new assessment for pick up, shouldn’t our property tax be lowered to address the new added fee? In other words unless this is done then aren’t the taxpayers being double-charged for this service?
And make no mistake about it, the taxpayers are being charged for their trash pick up whether it is a line-item charge or if it is just included in the public-works budget.
Also, I do not believe that the public was properly informed about the cost of the new pick up. Even The Garden Island (“TGI”) said that we would be paying $6 more per month — they said base fee — but the actual fee of $12 was never mentioned. If I understand it, I heard that the base fee would be for the transfer station and the other $6 was for the new pick up fee — is that right? And here again, the public can dump their trash at the transfer station for no charge but obviously, as with the house pick up, the fee is gathered from our property taxes or is part of public-works budget.
So, shouldn’t our taxes or public-works budget be adjusted downward to reflect the new added “base” fee?
And, shouldn’t our total recycling program have been put into a total workable mode before we started this new chargeable pick up service?
In other words, if the recycling program will be taking a lot of waste from the waste stream, then possibly the fee for the pick up can be lessened since there will be less waste. Plus, the county will now have some income from the recyclables that could lessen any new fee for pick up.
From what the TGI reports, the new pilot recycling program will have just one container that all your recyclables are put in. On the Mainland the people have three containers — one for bottles and cans, one for green waste and the other for the trash. Three different trucks pick these containers up on various days. Why are we going to put our recyclables in one container and have someone else separate them?
Again, why are we “ready, fire, aiming” when we should be getting the entire recycling program up and running before we have two programs going at the same time that may not be cost-effective? And, if my supposition is correct then wouldn’t we also be confusing the public with these two parallel programs?
(County Engineer) Donald (Fujimoto) said that the administration would have to ask for a money bill (I believe he said $50,000 — which is probably way low) to fund a new position to administer this pick up program. Adding a new level of bureaucracy with attached funding may not be the prudent thing to do before looking at the total recycling and pick up service.
Another question that I asked and Pat Gegen picked up on (and not answered) was where is the incentive for those who do recycle most of their trash and put one container out instead of three or one, 96-gallon bin? In other words the person who puts three containers out or one, 96-gallon bin is charged the same as the recycler who only puts one out — no incentive for those who do recycle.
Glenn Mickens, Kapa‘a
We already pay for trash collection
It is hard to see any benefit the proposed trash-collection fee gives to the county government and certainly not to us taxpayers. Under current rules, the county (Department of Public Works) Solid Waste Division’s budget of $12.05 million will be paid for by $3.8 million in tipping fees and $8.25 million from the general fund. The tipping fees are paid primarily by commercial haulers, i.e. businesses. The general fund is paid for by all taxpayers one way or another.
Bill No. 2367 proposes a plethora of fees to be added to property-tax bills as well as other charges. Does anyone believe that businesses will see reduced tipping fees or that other tax rates will be reduced to offset the trash collection increases?
There are other serious complications. Presumably a mechanism is already in place to track businesses who pay fees now for county trash pickup. How will the county administrators keep track of residential property owners and their taxes when they decide to opt in or opt out of the program? What will the administrative costs be in both the Solid Waste Division and the (county Department of Finance) Real Property Tax Billing/Collection division?
The trash-collection crews face their own challenges. How will they know what they should and should not pick up? That will be challenging enough for residences on county streets and roads. However, people who live on private roads bring their trash cans out to the intersection with a county road. There is no obvious connection between a particular trash can and the house it came from. One way to help the crews with both problems would be for the county to issue a theft-proof decal for each legitimate trash can. The decals would need serial numbers like those on auto license tags. Wonder how much that would cost?
Homeowners who opt out of street-side trash collection pose a serious problem. Many will do the right thing and take their trash to transfer stations. How will the county deal with the others who will not bother to go all the way to a transfer station? Do we law-abiding taxpayers get to pay yet again for roadside cleanup crews?
The bottom line is that businesses and taxpayers already pay for trash-collection costs. Bill No. 2367 merely shifts the burden. There are no apparent offsetting reductions in what we now pay, and there certainly will be added bureaucratic cost to implement and enforce the new system. Where is the benefit?
John Love, Kapa‘a
