Council trashes plans for municipal garbage collection

The Red Oak City Council has taken a step back from plans to incorporate mandatory garbage collection in the city.
Red Oak Mayor Shawnna Silvius said per the conversations that people have provided to the city, city administrator Lisa Kotter spent time working with city attorney Bri Sorensen on a ordinance regarding cleanup.
“This is not just cleaning up of parcels. This would be something that would be available to everyone. So if you have beds or mattresses or furniture or anything like that. The first one would be a curbside to inspire people to actually get rid of the things that they might have in their yard, Also, it would include a $4 fee that would be on the city utility bill, and we would be moving the date of 30 days to accumulate trash to 14, which is two weeks. And then also it would include a garbage collector permit fee for haulers, which is not uncommon either. We do permit fees for a number of other things,” Silvius explained.
Councilperson Sharon Bradley said her proposal was $4 per clean-up charged for residents per clean-up event, however, after talking with city administrator Lisa Kotter, the fee would be assessed per month on each resident’s water bill to raise funds. Part of the reason a monthly fee was being examined was because after looking into the costs of events, the amounts were surprising.
“I would not have guessed it was as expensive as it would have been. My experience, as I’ve explained, has been where you have a single hauler, and as part of the fee that you pay, you have a spring and fall cleanup. In those communities, similarly-sized, we spent $8,000 to $10,000 more a year, billed to us separately on top of our normal monthly fees for the curbside service that we were receiving. When I spoke to Shenandoah Sanitation, they had recently done a similarly sized curbside trash pickup, and they said that the bill was $35,000,” advised Kotter. “In addition, with Clint Roland working in Atlantic, he reached out because he knew that they had done it. I was surprised to hear that they had city employees doing it with dump trucks, and that their expense between time and disposal was $45,000. If we charge $4 per month to all the residents, for residential clean up events only, that yields us $115,000 over the course of a year. I think it’s fair to say that the first clean-up would likely be the most expensive, only because people haven’t had the opportunity to dispose of things before. Also, we would not using the $115,000 for anything other than the collection of trash. After the first clean-up, maybe we can assume that future ones would be less.”
Kotter added the city would be able to benefit from having the haulers all licensed, and it was very common in communities and creates an official relationship between the city and the hauler.
“By having everybody be licensed, we have a way to collect the data from them on an annual basis. If they’re obviously new to the community, the first time that they would sign up, they wouldn’t have that data, but at the annual renewal, they would be able to tell us how many customers they’re serving. Then we have more accurate information as to some future decision. If we decided to do a curbside program in the future, we would know that anybody that’s serving the community can tell us that. The only exception to the current requirement and in the draft code that has that you have to have a hauler, the only exception that you get is to haul your own garbage off your own house or your own business. Other than that, someone has to hire someone that’s licensed,” Kotter stated. “It’s by no means a money maker in terms of us getting somewhere between $2,000 and $3,000, depending on how many haulers actually signed up. The council can decide that amount, but I’ve seen communities that charge cheaply and then some that do $500, $1,000, different things like that.”
On the agenda was discussion of a request for proposals from outside haulers. Kotter said the item was added within the legal time frame for the agenda to be posted, and was only listed so the council members could discuss the matter if they chose. Kotter felt the changes being proposed would suit everyone.
“I feel like this is hitting the things that the majority of people were complaining about, taking away their right to choose, and also the containers. And it would benefit everyone because I don’t know who wouldn’t have something that they could put out that they wouldn’t normally have to take somewhere else. If you’re remodeling a bedroom or doing something like that, you would have stuff that you could put out, I would think. I can only speak to being in communities that have curbside service. And every single time we had a spring and fall cleanup, almost every household had something out there,” Kotter said. “The other thing is people complain because we would hold a cleanup event, and then the line would be so long that by the time they would get up there, it would already be done. So this would put a stop to that. We’ll make sure that if we do a drop-off, we will have enough roll-offs to take that. We will have the identification at the door. We would have to have city staff be there on those days to be able to make sure that the people who are paying for it are the only people who are allowed to take advantage of it if we did a drop-off.”
When asked if the fee could be reduced or eliminated if the city found it didn’t need multiple clean up days, Kotter said that it could. Also, if someone elderly needed help hauling items to the curb, they could call city hall in advance for assistance.
Councilperson John Haidsiak questioned why the $4 fee is being assessed to all residents. Councilperson Tim Fridolph countered that the ad hoc committee, led by John Gross, that came to the council said they wanted their option to choose their haulers and said that they would be more than happy to pay additional fees to do the citywide cleanup.
“That was right in the council minutes. Mr. Gross spoke on behalf of everyone that signed the petition saying that everyone would be willing to pay that. I think we have to look to that. We can’t stand still in what we’re doing in this community. We have to try something different. If we don’t try it, where are we going to go? I think giving it a year, if we try it, it’s going to make a difference. If we see something different, we can go try something else in another year. But I think it, myself, I think it will make a huge difference. I know people that have stuff that they probably just can’t afford to, or take it out, and go to the landfill. If you need help with it, I’m sure there are organizations who probably try to help you with that extra amount every year. We could maybe work on that. I think it’s a plus for the community to make some headway because we have to do something. And we’ve tried, we’ve talked about curbside pickup, and we’ve talked about this for so long. Let’s do something about it. That’s all I’m saying,” commented Fridolph
Bradley stated she was in favor of the added $4 on the water bill, and the multiple clean-up days for one year, at which point it would come back to the council for re-evaluation, to discuss what were the pros? What were the cons? With the city doing the licensing. It will have accurate information about how many people, assuming that the four main haulers would be required as a part of the licensing to report to the city what they’ve been doing.
Bradley asked how much people can put on the curb, as there are some people that have collected for years. Kotter gave some options.
“Some cities that will have like curbside yard waste in their code, where the city comes around, they’ll say you can have no more than a pile that’s 10 feet wide by 3 feet deep by whatever feet tall. If you feel like somebody’s going to put 16 years worth of stuff out there, then we can certainly have a limit. A kitchen remodel or a bathroom remodel that you’re putting all your drywall. There would be direction to whatever callers help us. They would understand what our restrictions are. We’re going to put a restriction out there. In the communities that I’ve worked in, the haulers would report back and say, hey, there was an appliance that was separate or whatever it is that wasn’t allowed. In a lot of communities I’ve been in, if you wanted an appliance, you paid extra. And so then they would be on a list. You might say no tires, no batteries, no construction equipment, no concrete. Again, that’s pretty common. And we can work with the haulers on what is expected,” stated Kotter.
The question was asked why more city clean-ups had not been done. Councilperson Brian Bills shared some details.
‘Until John Haidsiak took my place on the landfill committee, I was involved in that. And the landfill association actually did a couple of events that they had minimal funding for. The line was longer than the bins would haul. Then they actually had one of our local industries, I want to say Clarios, actually paid for an electronics recycle event. And other than that, there really hasn’t been much of anything happening, other than what private people have done and has been happening through donations,” said Bills.
Fridolph said while he liked the idea of a citywide cleanup, he thinks it’s little too optimistic.
“Doing it four times a year for $4, I would almost lean more towards something like $2 a month and do it twice a year, spring and fall, and reassess at that point. And then say, this is doing a good job. I’m not saying that $4 hurts me, but I get where the comments come from.  I have an issue because I know there was some comments said that creating a mandatory curbside pickup is punishing people. But really it’s not, because you’re really punishing those that don’t have service yet that forces them to sign up. Those that are already taking care of their trash, as you should as being part of a community, wouldn’t change for them. I think on this, it does affect all, even those that are currently taking care of things,” Fridolph advised. “I know that we did have it spoken that those on the petition would be glad to pay $2 to $3 more a year per month on their bill. I’m one of those that did not sign it, but I do pay for trash service. And I would not like to pay extra for my trash service to pick up somebody else’s trash. I could probably stand $2 for like a semi-annual cleanup, a spring and a fall.”
Kotter said it was up to the council whether they chose to do a curbside or drop off recycling event first.
“If you think it’s better to start with the drop-off, because that’s less expensive. And for everybody that’s able to get it there, maybe that’s the better choice. And I would say if we’re going to go ahead and license the haulers, then those who are licensed are the ones that get to be part of the service that we provide. We can’t have two roll-offs. It’s got to be enough. But we do have to take some notice so that we can get the word out there,” said Kotter.
Once the year was completed, and get things caught up, there would be less of a need to have multiple clean-up days every year.
“Soon maybe we’re down to one roll-off every other year. And it’s absolutely going to be the worst in the beginning. The first one will be the worst. It might have to be spread out, split it out among the wards, and make one day for each ward,” advised Kotter. “The thing we have to make clear is that we’re all in. We’re not going to pull the plug after two hours and tell everyone else in line they have to go home.”
Lynette Bruce with Batten Sanitation said there were a lot of conversations that would need to be had. Bruce said roll-off dumpsters could be obtained for the city, and the typical deposit was $450.
The council as a group agreed with Tim Fridolph’s suggestion of only doing two clean-up days rather than four. Kotter suggested starting with the drop off first, and then doing a curbside collection later on in the year. Fridolph said the city should also contact the landfill to let them know things were coming so it could be scheduled.
Councilman Adam Heitbrink asked what would happen if the funding was too much than what was needed. Kotter said if they found they only needed a portion of the funding, then the monthly fee could be dropped to $3 or $2. Also, while the code would be updated to include one guaranteed clean up day, Kotter anticipated the city would commit to more.
The council approved the first reading of the ordinance. The $4 fee per month was not set with the first reading.