City exploring options for garbage collection and its costs
Photo
Vehicles line up to unload garbage at the landfill in Janesville. How garbage is collected and how much residents could have to pay for that service is being looked at during a study session this week by the Janesville City Council.
Photo
Photo
JANESVILLE — The garbage issue in Janesville can be boiled down to three questions:
-- "Who's going to pay?"
-- "How much are they going to pay?"
-- "How will they pay?"
Sounds easy enough.
But the landfill's finances impact all parts of the city budget. Changing one of numerous variables impacts tax bills.
Janesville City Council members at a Tuesday study session will be asked to set the landfill's future direction, including whether the city should:
-- Continue to court outside garbage.
-- Reduce garbage collection services.
-- Impose a user fee.
-- Raise landfill fees.
The session will be televised live beginning at 6:30 p.m. on JATV on cable channel 98 and digital channel 994.
What has changed to spur the hard look at finances?
Janesville residents historically have enjoyed low garbage disposal costs. The money generated by landfill fees pays to:
-- Dispose the garbage.
-- Build new landfills.
-- Collect the garbage.
-- Recycle.
Since 2007, the landfill has made enough extra to put money back into the city budget. In 2009, for example, it subsidized the general fund as much as $450,000.
But trash tonnage recently dropped and so have revenues. By 2012, city officials believe the landfill will continue to support itself but not make enough money to subsidize other city services.
Without the subsidy from the landfill, the city budget would have a financial hole that would result in a 4.4 percent increase in property taxes in 2011.
The council could choose a variety of options to minimize that increase. Options include reducing collection services or charging residents user fees.
Landfill history
The city in 1972 paid $1.73 million to purchase 640 acres from Janesville Sand & Gravel. A contract allows the company the mineral rights and details a sequencing plan for mining operations so the city is assured of landfill space. The company also agrees not to dig below groundwater.
Because the company digs the hole, site preparation is minimal. It provides free clay for construction and closure. Transportation costs are low because the landfill is in the city.
Fees are collected from private and municipal waste haulers and people hauling their own waste. Janesville residents can carry in 60 gallons of waste at no charge. Non-city residents must pay, although some residents say employees often do not check IDs.
Since at least the mid-1980s, the city has accepted trash from other communities in Rock County.
In about 1999, Beloit stopped using the landfill. Janesville then contracted with Green County to replace that tonnage and more. The council at the time changed ordinances to lower what had been a high fee for waste coming in from outside the county.
"The direction was to go out and find more waste," John Whitcomb, operations director, said.
When the state imposed levy limits several years later, the council used profits from the landfill to maintain city services. This year, $450,000 was shifted to the general fund to help maintain current services.
A changing marketplace and the recession have hurt the landfill's profits.
Larger waste haulers, most of whom have their own landfills, are driving smaller haulers out of business.
The recession hit and consumer consumption—and resulting trash—dropped. The landfill lost 25 percent of its waste stream in 2009.
Most fixed costs to operate the landfill, meanwhile, remain the same, regardless of the tonnage.
Council options
The following options assume the landfill's current garbage customers remain through 2013, that the landfill fee is increased 3 percent in 2011 and that the city general fund relies less on income from the landfill.
The council could choose one alternative or a mix of alternatives:
-- Reduce or end residential trash collection. Collecting trash every other week would save $305,000. Requiring residents to set garbage on the same side of the street would save $239,000. Eliminating trash collection altogether would save more than $1 million annually. Each person would have to contract with a private waste hauler or haul garbage to the landfill themselves.
-- Charge residents user fees to cover the cost of trash collection. Recycling would still be paid for with landfill revenues. The cost to each customer would be $47 a year.
-- Increase property taxes. The owner of the average assessed home of $113,800 would pay an extra $35.75 in 2011, or a 4.4. percent increase. The increase would eat up 73 percent of the city's estimated available levy limit.
-- Charge a user fee, either a flat fee or one based on volume. A volume-based system could include tags for bags.
-- Raise tipping fees at the landfill. Some say keeping the gate rate low encourages more waste and less recycling. Whitcomb said the fee pays the cost of building, operating and closing the landfill. Increasing the fee could mean a loss of garbage.
The gate rate is $28.90 per ton, $13 of which is state fees, taxes and a surcharge.
The five haulers with contracts to dump at the landfill have negotiated different rates, and those vary from $27.50 to $28.10 per ton, Whitcomb said.
Even though the gate rate historically has been one of the lowest in the state, the city loses contracts to other landfills that undercut Janesville's bids, Whitcomb said.
"I don't know why that's a bad thing, to have low-cost disposal," he said.
The council also could maintain the status quo and increase the volume of out-of-county garbage to boost revenue.
That is a policy question, Whitcomb said.
"Long range, do we take in more garbage and shorten the life of our landfill?" he said.
Whitcomb believes staff could continue to find garbage and bring in more revenue, but that is not a certainty.
Boosting volume would decrease the landfill's life by one to three years from current projections, reaching capacity around 2016 or 2017.
Estimated costs to build, close and monitor the current landfill for 40 years is about $20 million. That does not include operations.
Some sound the warning that more garbage increases the risk of groundwater contamination. Whitcomb believes that is a moot point.
"We already own a landfill in town," he said. "Those environmental concerns are there no matter how much trash is taken in. This community has been willing to bear that risk since the '50s."
May 26, 2010 at 10:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
I agree with a previous poster, I frequently use the Demolition Landfill and never get ID'd. I have seen some people with huge trucks of stuff but that is it. I've never seen anyone at either landfill ever fork over any money to dump their stuff.
I feel the major problem is people are not educated in recycling. I am far from a tree hugger but I recycle all I can because businesses make money from recycling and the more money they make, the more they are taxed. Throwing away stuff in the garbage doesn't make anyone money and instead raises our taxes. Anyone ever notice besides cardboard/papers most businesses don't have recycling bins?
Aluminum, Plastic, Paper, Cardboard are all things that can be recycled people. Even metals like steel, copper, iron, etc. Take them to Alter Metals in Town or Behr's in South Beloit. They will pay you CASH for them! How about we all stop being lazy and make an effort to only throw away the "REAL GARBAGE?"
May 26, 2010 at 12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
The story starts out:
-- "Who's going to pay?"
-- "How much are they going to pay?"
-- "How will they pay?"
Bull dung! Why not start with the premise that if revenues are down, expenses should be cut?
May 25, 2010 at 6:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mouse , I am sure you can contact Gm and buy the building to start your profitable business.
May 25, 2010 at 4:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
marge123 Yes of course "liability", now there is disabling word. At no time should we advance our ability, because of liability.
Let's just do it the old fashioned way - more tax, less pick up, user fees.
Wow! the modern concepts abound, just like education.
Let's ask the garbage man to take a cut in pay, right? Or maybe the special bags will make the garbage just disappear.
May 25, 2010 at 2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Before moving back to Janesville, I lived in a small village and we were required to buy special bags to dispose of our garbage I believe they were $2.00 for kitchen size and $3.00 for 30 gallon size. They also rented dumpster for 3 days at a time for clean-up renovation etc..... These were very reasonable and also would help some city residents clean up there properties. Which there are several properties that could use this service. Just my two cents worth.... I rather buy special bags then see my taxes go up more.
May 25, 2010 at 2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mouse, I wasn't trying to be snarky-just pointing out that it is up to Gm as to what happens to the building. I have worked in that building and I don't believe the city would have the resources to maintain it , and of course the liability issues.
May 25, 2010 at 12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Leave the landfill and trash collection alone. The budget shortfall is coming from the general fund and not the landfill.
If you review the landfill tonnage chart you will see that the amount of trash brought in is down from the total tonnage from the last two years, but up from the previous fourteen years.
The city council needs to remember what kind of financial mess our city is in and stop wasting money. The $11,000 that the city agreed to spend on a sign for the Westgate businesses was a good example of foolish spending.
May 25, 2010 at 12:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
whatdoyouthinkofthat...Ithinkyouliveinadreamworld.
May 25, 2010 at 12:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
marge123
It's not my suggestion to have it owned by the City.
This was just an idea to maintain the building, whilst giving people jobs.
Would you sooner it just sit empty?
Sorry I might have given you the wrong idea.
May 25, 2010 at 12:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
So, ilovehockey, next question is: Who is spinning this story? Is the Gazette, or city council? It has nothing to do with the landfill. Why not focus on the budget shortfalls of the city and where the extra money is going? $450,000 is quite a bit of money. I would say the landfill is doing just fine.
May 25, 2010 at 11:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
The city does not (and I hope they never do) own the GM plant.
May 25, 2010 at 11:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Turn the GM plant into a larger than life recycling plant, using all the plastic materials to manufacture composite materials.
Utilize the plant by melt the glass and other raw material for other uses.
Would put many back to work, and bring good business to Janesville.
Just a thought that could use some ideas so the plant don't sit empty,and the garbage could become revenue.
May 25, 2010 at 10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
icommon, you are correct. The article states that the garbage is self sufficent, it is the general fund that is not. So why mess with the garbage?
May 25, 2010 at 10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
If PAYT starts up, won't some people realize how much they accumulate and are paying to dispose of? Won't that lead to more back yard burning barrels?? Just asking. Most people are honest, but there are people like that out there.
May 25, 2010 at 9:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Here's a thought. Rather than rely on the landfill subsidizing other services, why not look at the services that need the subsidies from the landfill and make them more efficient? Ohh, Wait, it is a lot easier to just grab more money rather than challenge the efficiency of city services.
May 25, 2010 at 8:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
PAYT is a beautiful theoretical solution for a perfect theoretical world where everyone behaves perfectly and responsibly. That, however, does not describe Janesville. Unless you’ve seen it in operation, I’d suggest you refrain from praising it.
May 25, 2010 at 8:33 a.m.
May 25, 2010 at 7:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Janesville residents pay for waste collection through property taxes, regardless of how much—or how little—trash they generate. Pay-As-You-throw (PAYT) breaks with tradition by treating trash services just like electricity, gas, and other utilities. Households pay a variable rate depending on the amount of service they use. The program is simple and fair. The less individuals throw away, the less they pay.
Residents frequently overuse solid waste services in a fixed fee system because local tax levies for solid waste collection remain largely invisible to consumers. Essentially, flat fees systems break the link between the act of discarding waste and the payment for collection services. Households face the same cost regardless of how much waste they generate, with little or no incentive to produce less waste. This can lead people to generate more waste than they would if charged a variable rate.
PAYT is an effective tool for communities struggling to cope with soaring municipal solid waste management expenses. The major economic impact of introducing PAYT systems is on cost savings to municipalities from reduced waste volume and increased recyclable volume, leading to lower collection costs and higher revenues from the sale of recyclable materials. Less solid waste may also reduce landfill tipping fees and extend landfill life.
May 25, 2010 at 7:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
I'll tell you what I have been though some city's that made is so pricey to get rid of trash. that people simply throw trash everywhere or simply though it out back and burn it. The city can go every other week. I have a truck if I need to go to the dump I go.
May 25, 2010 at 7:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
If the city needs to raise annual fees, so be it. But the really, really bad ideas here are:
- “Collecting trash every other week would save $305,000.” I don’t know about anybody else, but in the summer, my garbage gets pretty ripe by the end of a week. After two weeks, it would be truly nauseous. This would be a boon only for the wild animals we’d rather not have in our subdivisions, like raccoons, skunks, and possum.
- “. . . tags for bags.” This goes beyond bad ideas and well into egregiously stupid territory. I’ve seen this done in other areas, and it always causes problems. First, you have to hire new people to manage the program, which increases costs further. Second, if you live on a busy street, your tags tend to “disappear” as the local disadvantaged youth discover a new revenue opportunity. Third, people will simply not buy tags and dump their garbage elsewhere – roadside, in parks, in front of other people’s houses (how do you prove it’s not your garbage?), and sometimes, right in front of city hall (my personal favourite). Absolutely, positively, unacceptable.
Obviously, your garbage costs can’t exceed revenues, but don’t turn garbage collection into a nightmare for the entire city.
May 25, 2010 at 6:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/citysite/...
May 25, 2010 at 6:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
we should also explore options on the people who explore options.. Everyone wants to cut services or raise fees but where is the move from the public to streamline the city and government people. It starts at the top so let's see some action there city government
May 25, 2010 at 12:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
The landfill only has capacity until 2017? What then?
May 25, 2010 at 12:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Excellent insight by MooShoo. Tough decisions are going to have to be made all over this city and county. The easy government money is drying up. No more insentive money for housing, autos, and unemployment checks are quickly drying up. Some will be able to afford their higher tax bills, water bills, and others will have trouble buying groceries. Long term decisions will have to be made for the good of all. More foreclosures will not help our tax base.
May 24, 2010 at 9:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
mooshoo i agree %100
May 24, 2010 at 7:36 p.m.
May 24, 2010 at 6:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
call tony soprano...he'll get rid of yo garbage...for a price...
May 24, 2010 at 5:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
When a business sees a reduction in it's orders it doesn't make up for it by raising prices, it lowers prices to increase business. Enforcing special payments that normally might be overlooked for long time customers is another method used to increase revenue. Salesmen are pressured to get new orders.
Here's a plan:
1)Lower tipping fees
2)Enforce the policies better
3)Get new business
4)Court recyclers to invest here
If the City decides to raise taxes 3-4%, what are the chances taxes will go down by the same amount after normal land fill usage resumes?
May 24, 2010 at 5:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
The landfill will fill up eventually. Delaying it won't resolve the issue indefinitely.
May 24, 2010 at 4:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Bigdaddy,
I agree they could get more accounts, but what do we do when this landfill is full in 2016 or 2017?
May 24, 2010 at 4:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
If you have the Landfill, why don't they go after commercial accounts. Like roll of dumpsters. You guys should also sit down at the 4 way corner too the landfill out side of Delavan and see all those different companys dumping there. Figure out how many of those guy you could get, instead of figuring out if this doesn't, your taxes will go up by this much.
May 24, 2010 at 4:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
I'm one of the city residents who can verify that they don't ask for ID. I have been to the dump countless times and we have NEVER been asked for ID when we've taken stuff to the dump. They cleary have resident and non-resident rates posted on the side of the building where you stop before entering the dump, but we've never even been asked if we're residents let alone asked for proof of residency. I don't really see the point of posting rates and having such policies if they're not going to enforce them. How about enforcing policies that are already in place and charging non-residents. Then, looking at options for dealing with the budget shortfalls.
May 24, 2010 at 4:37 p.m.
May 24, 2010 at 4:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Sandman-Did you read the article or just post something snarky for the sake of being snarky?
May 24, 2010 at 4:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yeah, let's not pick up garbage or have decent water in this city and spend the money we save on an ice arena. That's planning (by idiots!).
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.