Update 11/23/11: Well, they voted to do it. Be sure to read the comments on the PJS story.
PEORIA -- The Peoria City Council will soon vote on a flat tax/fee to increase the already onerous $6 monthly garbage tax/fee by 133 percent, to $14 a month. This is terrible public policy.
It's a flat tax that makes the poor, and/or the single person living in a small house with barely any trash at all, pay the same amount as the family of eight living in a McMansion.
Included in the proposal is a requirement that would deliver a huge toter to everyone, even those that don't want it or can't handle it.
City officials claim they need the money to pay for road improvements.
And we get this from Mayor Jim Ardis, who was elected on a promise to repeal the $6 tax/fee, but never did it. Now he wants more. (Can this be the reason the public voted not to allow the city to run the water company? Who knows what the council would do if it could raise water rates at will.)
There are so many questions about what's going on here:
- Instead of a flat tax/fee, why not a property tax increase? I have seen no information on what would be required of a property tax hike to raise the same amount of money. Has this never been discussed? Why not?
- Like the $6 tax/fee, it will be on the water bills. How much more will the water company be paid to collect this extra amount, and will a poor person who cannot pay it actually lose water service and perhaps be evicted because they can't pay the trash tax/fee?
- It's also bad public policy to use garbage tax/fees to fix the roads.
- It will be a huge incentive to not recycle, as many people cannot store 2 large containers.
- Speaking of that, who manufacturers the containers? Are there conflict of interest issues here? That wouldn't be unknown in Peoria. Are they made in the USA? Does the manufacturing process pollute the environment?
Here is a letter activist Joyce Harant sent to the Peoria City Council:
- I have not heard your discussion of the garbage fee or toter issue discussed with any consideration of their impact on improving future household recycling. It is my opinion that the public does not want to pay per month for a toter that is much larger than what they need. If they are forced into it-- they will have a disincentive to recycle-- this is the opposite of what we should be pursuing.
- The toter physical size as well as weight when full is of importance to residents. If I have a 95 gallon toter that I place one small bag in-- the issue is not weight but size of the toter. I will not be happy to pay for the toter- and I will be less likely to be able to store two 95 gal toters- one for garbage and one for recycling. If one has to chose one (because of inadequate home storage-- they will have to chose the garbage toter not the recycling toter.
- If you mandate toters, you need to have a full range from 40- 95 gallons available. Charge people if they want to switch from their first choice. Enable people for the one week a year that they have extra to buy a sticker. Give people choices that makes it more likely that they will see the benefit of recycling. Please do not make decisions that create direct or indirect disincentives for people to recycle.
- I ask that this issue should be discussed in a more holistic discussion of recycling, creating jobs from recycled materials and how to reduce what is eventually landfilled. It is my understanding that Peoria County will be conducting a very detailed update of the Peoria County Solid Waste Management Plan. I urge the City of Peoria to be a key participant in this process. I suggest that how the City of Peoria and all municipalities collect waste, recylce and develop jobs by re-using the recycled materials should be key to the SWMP plan update.
I cannot think this plan represents any long term research or evaluations of comparable city experiences. -30-
Comments