Peoria Seeks Sweeping Changes to City’s Garbage Hauling

City Council members are getting a jump on a new garbage contract with potential for proposals that could leave city residents paying unpopular fees.

The year 2009 is winding down—and so is Peoria’s $4.5 million annual garbage contract set to expire at the end of December after almost twenty years. The end of the current contract with Waste Management prompted city council members to give Public Works Director David Barber permission to seek proposals for the city’s 2010 contract. Proposals will aim to help Peoria cut costs in order to ease the strain of a $10 million budget deficit. Barber will make a recommendation to the City Council on which contract to choose in October. While the city seeks bidders on the new contract, council members and their constituents will have plenty of time to deliberate over options presently up for grabs, including a “pay-as-you-throw program,” the elimination of free landscape waste hauling, mandatory tote ownership, and incentives for increased recycling participation.

First Steps

The big brouhaha began with a phone call placed in early July to Bob Wraight, Morton’s Public Works Director. The call was from At-Large City Councilman Eric Turner who asked questions regarding Morton’s “pay-as-you-throw” system for hauling garbage and yard waste. The program Turner proposes would require Peoria residents to pay a $2.50 per-can fee to purchase stickers at local grocery stores or retailers to place on cans of garbage tossed out each week. Only garbage cans with stickers would be hauled away. In Morton, stickers can be purchased and placed on 32-gallon cans. “Pay-as-you-throw” would be a “first” for the city of Peoria and would “eliminate” the $6/month garbage fee Peoria residents currently see tacked on to their water bills by “rolling” the fee into the city’s tax base. The $6 fee was instituted in 2003 to help balance the city’s budget at the time.

“Eliminating the $6 fee is a big part of the program,” says Turner. “Peoria households are currently paying $72 annually with the $6 fee. By rolling the fee into the tax base, each household would pay $31 or $32 a year.”

“Pay-as-you-throw” derives from the “paygo” or “pay-as-you-go” concept advocated by the Blue Dogs, a 51-member coalition of conservative Democrats in Washington, D.C. formed in 1994 when Republicans had control of Congress. Pay-as-you-go requires Congress to pay for new spending while making cuts elsewhere in the federal budget. Turner hopes the idea will have the same effect on the state level.

The program is also expected to help increase recycling efforts in the city. “I had talked to a number of people in Morton and Washington and communities around the country who had tried (pay-as-you-throw) to help increase the percentage of people recycling,” says Turner.

Given the fact that the more garbage a household throws out, the more individuals will have to pay, Turner hopes pay-as-you-throw will encourage more recycling efforts among Peoria residents and raise the current nine percent recycling rate in the city. Peorians pay $3.25 per month to recycle under the current subscription program. A citywide recycling option is under consideration. Peoria is the only metropolitan area in the state lacking a widespread recycling program.

Garbage Going Green

Dave Pittman, associated with the Sierra Club and Global Warming Solutions Group (GWSG), says he supports pay-as-you-throw if it’s the best way to increase the amount of recycling in Peoria. In spite of his support, he also thinks the program presents certain challenges.

“If you’re already recycling, pay-as-you-throw would be easy to begin,” he says. “If not, it would definitely require some education. The Federal EPA’s web site says that 80 percent of cities already engaged in pay-as-you-throw would not want to go back to a previous program. They are very happy with it.”

Pittman says he does not support the current $3.25 per month recycling fee. “Peoria is dead last on recycling because nobody wants to pay a $3.25 per month fee,” he says. “I think communities are looking for their cities to say ‘thank you,’ for recycling, and doing something to help the environment, not slap them with another fee to pay.”

One option for reducing the fee involves placing recyclable items in 64- or 90- gallon totes, which the city is discussing providing its residents. According to Mike Mitchell, executive director with the Illinois Recycling Association, the city could distribute totes for garbage and a separate cart for recycled items to each household. Additional trash would require a sticker in order for Waste Management to haul it away. This option would impose no additional recycling fee on city residents.

Third District Councilman Timothy Riggenbach says he has heard from several people who advocate universal recycling but who are concerned about costs. “A big factor is the costs of the services we’re thinking of providing,” he says, “and at this stage in the game, we really don’t know what universal recycling will cost us. We also want to make certain people will use this service rather than end up paying for something they won’t use.”

Yard waste pickup also raises cost concerns. Riggenbach says the service is a necessity in older neighborhoods where old mature trees produce a lot of leaves. “I probably put out about fifty bags worth (of leaves) in the fall,” he says. “But there’s the issue of who pays for what when my leaves blow into my neighbor’s yard. We need to do what is most fair and most cost-effective for everyone.”

Barber proposes the elimination of free landscape waste hauling with the exception of a few days per year when yard waste could be removed without the added fee. One proposal consisted of a $1 fee per bag for hauling trash such as leaves, grass, or tree limbs. Presently, the charge to haul yard waste is part of the city’s base contract with Waste Management. Elimination of free landscape waste hauling is estimated to save the city $1.2 million. The elimination would take effect in the spring of 2010.

City Hall will have a good idea of proposal costs once bids have been sought. Barber says local lawmakers and city leaders will need specific figures before the city moves forward.

“We’re going to take prices (on various proposals),” he says. “Until we take prices, there’s no recommendation.”

Bandied Opinions

Pay-as-you-throw and other contract discussions among city council members as well as their constituents have not been without controversy. Councilmen-at-Large Ryan Spain and George Jacobs are concerned pay-as-you-throw may instigate illegal dumping in order to avoid having to pay the extra sticker fee, although other cities that implement the program have experienced little problem with illegalities.

“I think pay-as-you-throw is an interesting option,” says Jacobs, “but initially, it will be a challenge to implement it in Peoria. I think it’s good to continue to look at different options and keep everything on the table, and I think we need to look at options that are the most cost-effective.”

Jacobs claims he believes the public has been “pretty satisfied” with the current garbage program. “I think there will be a real hesitation in dramatically decreasing services,” he says.

Second District Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken says any change in the current garbage program, particularly recycling, will require constituent education.

“We’ll need to educate people on recycling by putting the steps for proper recycling on a web site,” she says. “I think people will be surprised at how little solid waste they actually have once they start efficiently recycling. We’ll need to spend time with the public getting people used to the idea.”

City Councilman-at-Large Jim Montelongo is all in support of increasing recycling in Peoria. “I’d like to see Peoria as a place that recycles and ‘goes green,’” he says.

The Councilman also advocates yard waste pickup once every two weeks. Van Auken says she is adamantly opposed to eliminating free yard waste pickup. The Councilwoman claims she lives on one acre of land and accumulates yard waste that goes to the trash about once a week in the summer and fall.

“Paying someone to haul it away would get very expensive very quickly,” she says. “I do mulch weeds and grass clippings, but you can’t mulch tree limbs. My concern is that we will have people dumping a lot of yard waste into ravines and creeks or leaving it piled up in their yard or simply burning it, which would lead to a lot of pollution. You simply have to give people some desired place to put yard waste. The new contract needs yard waste pick up.”

Aside from city council members’ concerns, a group of neighborhood representatives known as The Neighborhood Alliance, which represents about forty neighborhood associations in Peoria, presented cost concerns to City Hall in mid-August regarding the new contract. Several alliance members cited opposition to additional costs for hauling landscape waste arguing that it could discourage those who choose to provide upkeep to abandoned properties by “penalizing” them with an extra fee.

Kicking it to the Curb

One of the more recent options presented to the city council regarding the garbage contract has been requesting residents in older neighborhoods to move their trash from the alleys to the curbside for pickup. Garbage companies in favor of reducing government costs argue that larger trucks can damage alleys, leading to expensive repairs. Waste Management has claimed large trucks help reduce costs.

But Barbara Van Auken argues moving trash to the curb will create problems due to the fact that garbage trucks will have to navigate around vehicles parked on both sides of the street, a privilege older neighborhoods permit.

“I’m absolutely totally opposed to it,” says Van Auken. “I would never support that. That’s what alleys were built for. From a practical point of view, people have two to three cars—some parked bumper to bumper on the street. Trash collectors cannot navigate around them. It would just be one big unworkable mess.”

Curbside pickup may also pose a problem for elderly residents who find it physically challenging to haul their garbage from the alley to the curb.

“It may prove physically difficult for older citizens,” says George Jacobs. “Some citizens I’ve spoken with have told me (curbside pickup) would be a significant burden on them.”

Jacobs also claims the physical layout of the property could pose a problem. “Some of our older neighborhoods were built for alley pickup,” he says.

Eric Turner is also an advocate for alley pickup. “People are used to it,” he says, “and garbage companies are planning to go to bigger trucks in the years to come.”

“There’s definitely areas in our city where we need to continue alley pickup,” says Montelongo, “especially in older neighborhoods.”

The practice is not new to the Peoria area. West Peoria has been practicing curbside collections for about four months. The West Side initiated the change to prevent trash from being dumped improperly as well as to prevent garbage trucks from deteriorating alleys.

For all the bantering, the new contract is still in the first stages of development. “We’ve had some great dialogue among constituents in the district,” says Riggenbach. “But right now, we’re in the very beginning stages of looking at pay-as-you-go and everything that could possibly be included in a new contract.”