A Discussion on the Proposed Westminster Solid Waste Cost Recovery Fee
April 21st, 2004
I want to share with you some thoughts as to how the idea of a trash collection recovery fee came together and encourage you to give me your feedback. Thank you in advance to taking the time to read through this discussion with respect to how continued declining municipal revenues have dramatically impacted the City’s finances and a proposed remedy for the FY 2005 Budget.
As many of you are aware, many local governments are being forced to either make cuts in services or raise property taxes. The Westminster FY 05 Budget proposes neither. No one wants to pay more for goods and services and certainly nobody wants to pay more taxes or fees to government. Everyone wants good roads and certainly everyone has a keen interest in increased Fire, EMS and Police services.
In the FY 2005 proposal, to raise additional revenue, I have included a Solid Waste and Recycling Cost Recovery Fee for only the households who receive this benefit.
At present, the City provides these services to about 4,600 residential units at no cost. Not all city taxpayers receive this benefit. Businesses and multifamily units, such as Parr’s Ridge, Middlebrook Apartments, pay for their own trash removal. Beginning July 1, 2004, these services will cost all City taxpayers approximately $600,000. This amounts to about $130 for each household. These costs have increased $97,000.00 in the past two years –a cost which has been fully absorbed by the City. How much longer can the City absorb these costs without additional revenue?
I propose that the City recover $16.25 per quarter for a total of $65 a year (18 cents per day) from each household who receives this service; which amounts to 50% of the City’s total cost of $130 per household.
The Solid Waste and Recycling Cost Recovery Fee is a fair and equitable means to generate additional revenue for the City for the following reasons:
1. The cost of this municipal service is billed directly to only the users of this specific service.
It is a basic fairness issue. Westminster requires all business and apartment owners with 4 or more units to pay for their own trash collection. A property tax increase would require these business owners to incur additional costs for a service for which they do not benefit. They will certainly pass those costs on to their customers and then not only will our citizens be paying for additional taxes but they will also pay additional rental housing and consumer goods and services expenses. With trash collection recovery fee - businesses and multifamily residential units will no longer subsidize residential trash collection.
2. Currently Westminster negotiates a contract for trash removal to take advantage of the economies of scale, bringing down the cost to approximately $130.00 per year per household as opposed to approximately $240.00 per year that it would cost each and every homeowner if the City did not collectively bargain for a reduced rate. Even at full cost recovery, the City’s contract price for solid waste and recycling collection and disposal service is still much cheaper than, for example, what County residents pay for the same service.
3. In the past, this service was paid for out of general tax revenues. That said – the challenges of declining municipal revenues in the face of rising costs, unfunded mandates and increased demands for road improvements, public safety and services bring us to a new territory. New challenges demand new approaches. It’s no longer business as usual for many municipalities such as Westminster.
4. Many cities and towns are currently discussing the merits of a cost recovery for trash pick collection. This proposal recommends that the City maintain bulk trash pick-up at no charge to our residents. Just as cities and towns charge a cost recovery fee for water and sewer, parking and recreation. It is important for those who benefit from a specific service – contribute for the provision of that particular service. General tax revenues are for the purpose of pooling our resources for basic services that are shared by the greater community and are of benefit to the community at large. Trash collection is not provided to all taxpayers – those who benefit ought to contribute to their specific benefit.
5 This cost recovery is pro-business. At a time when Westminster is working hard to continue to attract business and commercial tax base and local community employment – to tax businesses for a service that they do not receive is basically unfair and certainly not an inducement for attracting companies to bring additional employment to Westminster. If it is bad enough to pay more for goods and services – how would you like to pay for a service that you do not get?
6. It would be the first step in the eventual direction of developing a “pay-as-you-throw” approach in an attempt to increase recycling and reduce the amount of municipal solid waste per household. The details will require some out-of-the-box approaches, but the theory is that if economics and markets forces can be introduced to how trash is collected and disposed, it is hoped that eventually the overall expense of the City could be reduced and passed on to citizens. (Of course, this initiative is also good for the environment…)
The budget I presented last Monday, April 19th, 2004 is a reflection of months of hard work by the staff, the Council Finance Committee and myself. This budget concentrates on roads, public safety, and technological infrastructure that will act as a staff extender; while not proposing an increase in property taxes. If we do not do something now about additional revenues, the City would be forced to make additional deep cuts into an already bare bones budget, cut services or raise property taxes.
Our first look at this year’s budget had a shortfall of approximately $4.2 million. Cumulatively since Fiscal Year 2001, our State funding for Highway User Fees has been reduced by approximately $650,000 and our expenses for Public Safety increased by approximately $700,000. During the last two years our healthcare benefit costs have increased by approximately $200,000 and the cost of trash collection has increased by $97,000.00. It is quickly apparent that while we have had a decline in income, costs have continued to increase. Additionally – we have postponed, year after year, $246,000.00 worth of much needed infrastructure technology that we simply cannot put off any longer. As anybody that has driven through Westminster over the past several months understands, the previous two winters have been brutal to the City’s paved streets and alleys. In order to ensure that the City does not have to invest millions of dollars in future reconstruction projects, it is necessary for us to make a significant investment of $750,000.00 in the road overlay program at this time.
The challenges that we face are daunting, but by working together, we can all do better. As always, your thoughtful consideration is appreciated regardless of the outcome on any particular issue. Whether we agree or disagree, always find my door open for friendly civil and constructive dialogue. I need your feedback.
Kevin Dayhoff, Mayor of Westminster
Home Office: P. O. Box 1245, Westminster, MD 21158 kdayhoff@carr.org
*****
Westminster Dept Public Works Solid Waste Man
Westminster Dept Public Works Solid Waste Man Recycling
Westminster Dept Public Works Solid Waste Man 20040415 Solid Waste and Recycling Cost Recovery Fee
Westminster Dept Finance Budget 20040415 Solid Waste and Recycling Cost Recovery Fee
Westminster Dept Finance Budget
Environmentalism Solid Waste Man Pay as You Throw
Environmentalism Solid Waste Man Recycling
