AJC: DeKalb Considering Cutting Back on Trash Pickup
Decatur Metro | October 20, 2011As budgets have gotten tighter and tighter over the past few months/years, DeKalb County residents have repeatedly recommended that the county cut back trash pickup to once a week. Currently trash is picked up twice a week.
Well, the AJC reports this morning that the DeKalb County Commission is finally considering cutting back on trash pickup. According to the news org…
Going to once weekly pickup would allow the fee, which last went up in 2006, to stay the same through 2015, said Ted Rhinehart, the county’s deputy chief operating officer for infrastructure.
It also would gradually let the county eliminate 100 full-time jobs, mostly through attrition, and at least 25 collection trucks. Surplus vehicles and gear would be sold.
And more workers would be free to clean up roadways of litter and debris, as well as handle the mowing and landscaping on county land along those roads.
Those opposed to the change quoted in the article cite the smell of garbage and the potential for messy sidewalks as major concerns. As a Decatur resident with just once-a-week pickup, I can’t say I’ve noticed either of those things being a major problem.
Latest from Decaturish
As a Dekalb resident, I have stated repeatedly that our trash collection is TOO good and could be cut back to once a week pickup with little to no negative effects.
As another DeKalb resident, I agree. Trash on Tuesday and Friday, recycling on Wednesday, yard waste on Monday. Big items on demand. I feel like I see the trash guys almost every day of the work week.
I was sad to move from the county into the City. I loved my trash pick-up! We joked that we had to put a note on the car to make sure they did not take it – they pick up everything. I had to learn to use the special bags and only one day a week….but yes, the county could save lots of money if they cut the one day.
I lived in DeKalb in my younger days in a house with four other guys. When we moved out, we generated a literal wall of discards, about 4 feet high and 30 or 40 feet long. Couches, a homemade bar, old shipping palettes, car parts, a TV, God knows what else.
Our usual trash crew, on their usual rounds, carted off the whole thing. They may have been cursing us under their breath, but the didn’t leave a scrap behind. Unbelievable.
Dude, did I live with you?!?
As a Decatur resident, I’m happy with once a week pick-up. But whenever cost savings are proposed by cutting back a service, it’s important to make sure that the decision-makers are considering all the unintended and unmeasured effects. For example, the volume of garbage will not change just because the frequency of collection has. So, just for example and not because I’ve seen the DeKalb County estimates,I’d be cautious about saying that cutting the frequency of collection by half would result in cutting costs by half. My guess is that each garbage pick-up stop will take longer because residents may have had to add a collection container or two to accomodate the increase in accumulated garbage.
The main savings is probably not from cutting pickup necessarily, but in not refilling the 100 positions and the benefits and retirements that would eventually accompany them if filled. But with the price of gas, perhaps a chunk there too.
Dekalb needs the money for other things. The Superintendent is woefully underpaid… And by underpaid, I mean she makes more than the Governor of GA, and the Vice President of the United States.
I passed some “SPLOST” yard signs the other day and couldn’t help thinking along these lines. My general inclination tends toward supporting teachers, students and schools in general. But the idea of putting more money in the hands of DeKalb administrators leaves me feeling more than a little uneasy.
I don’t know about other school systems, but I think City Schools of Decatur students will be hurt badly if SPLOST is not passed. My lay impression is that the funding that CSD counted on getting from SPLOST to pay down debt for things like the new 4/5 Academy at Fifth Avenue would have to come out of the CSD operating budget. That would result in a tremendous cut in services, programs, teachers, and everything else that CSD provides. If the intent is to reform DeKalb County government or the DeKalb County School System, wouldn’t it be more effective and less destructive to children and the housing market, to vote in new leadership rather than vote down SPLOST? If SPLOST goes away, DeKalb leaders will still be there, collecting their salaries and bonuses, while schools and children suffer.
I think we agree. I will support SPLOST because I want the kids and teachers to have the resources they need to be successful. My discomfort comes from knowing that – and here I am speaking really about DeKalb County schools and not CSD – the school board cannot be relied upon to make more responsible decisions than the ones mentioned here about the superintendent’s compensation (among others).
As to trash pickup – switching to once per week seems like the proverbial low-hangning fruit, though I would be unsurprised if, as you surmise, they have underestimated the actual savings.
Er – hanging.
If the board cannot be relied upon — and I agree, it can’t — then why would you assume that the money will give kids and teachers what they need to be successful?
I suppose it’s more of coming at it from the other direction – faith that some of the dollars will get where they need to go. If the funding doesn’t exist it certainly cannot be there for books and all (whether or not some pennies from every dollar go to bloated salaries).
Re cost-savings by cutting 100 positions: Yes, that would probably be a huge savings as well as the reduction in gasoline and other costs in maintaining trucks that are no longer needed.
My point is that, if there’s currently 200 positions and 50 trucks (hypothetical of course), then I wouldn’t assume that reducing the frequency of pick-up by half means that only 100 positions and 25 trucks are needed. Only the frequency has been reduced, not the volume. On the one day that garbage is collected, more staff and trucks per collection day may be needed than previously.
Re CEO salary: I’d agree that garbage collection services should be reduced to maintain that high level of salary as long as the CEO assists in the collection!
I am so over super high salaries. Let’s offer lower CEO-level salaries and bonuses in government by 1/4 to 1/2 and then see if the quality of applicants really drops. The quality may paradoxically rise as the positions attract folks more interested in the work than the salary and cachet of being an “executive”. (I’m not talking about the worker bee or techno-bee or professional bee salaries but the top level “executive” salaries.)
We’re talking about a county whose school board recently voted to almost double the pay of a temorary superintendent AND give her $20k/year in “expense reimbursement” for which she did not have to submit receipts. So the chances of getting any level of sanity injected into compensation seem rather low.
I would argue that once per week pickup has the potential to reduce the amount of waste people generate. It could do this be encouraging people to join the recycling program. It will also make the amount waste people produce per week more noticable than it is when taken away more frequently in smaller, easier to drag to the curb quantities. If you have a bigger/heavier pile of trash, and a conscience, you might look at your pile of trash and consider ways to make purchasing decisions that result in less waste.
I agree that it might pressure folks to reconsider what they are currently throwing away as garbage but could really be putting in recycling. But changing buying and usage behavior will probably take longer. I’m not necessarily against reducing the frequency of pick up–once per week works fine in Decatur–I just hope that DeKalb isn’t overestimating the savings. In my experience, folks often overestimate savings from cost-cutting measures if they do not carefully look at the unintended and unmeasured effects. For example, as the world first started moving into more electronic- and web-based operations, some predicted savings in costs and paper that never materialized. They did not factor in the costs of equipping and training every worker, even blue collar workers, to do most administrative processes electronically, the bottomless need for IT support, and the fact that fast, cheap printers would result in the use of more paper, not less.
Agreed. It will take time for changes to take place.
As for paper, that’s a matter of generational change. A lot of peope need to die or retire before we’ll see a significant reduction in paper usage.
I agree that the more junior the staff, the more likely they are to communicate electronically but I have observed that unnecessary printing correlates more with laziness and time pressure than with age. I see people print something out for yet another meeting without looking for the last printout they made or saving the current one for the next use. It’s just print and toss. In the days of expensive copiers, limits were placed on what was copied and what was copied. Individual desk printers allow folks to be wasteful without anyone noticing. My kids are no better. They use up expensive color print cartridges at a terrible rate if I don’t clamp down. There’s something irresistible to kids about color inkjet printers. I’m considering only replacing the black cartridge.
You know when I figured out how much paper I could do without? when I opened up shop for myself and started having to spend my very own money on every ream of paper and every printer cartridge. I probably consume less than half the amount of paper I used to in my business, because now I save every sheet and use the other side and also think carefully before printing anything. It helps that electronic documents have become more ubiquitous and easier to use. But mainly, like so much else to do with resource consumption, it’s about habit. If companies–and families–got serious about rationing paper and ink, our consumption would decrease.
Dekalb is going to make recycling easier (no initial fee anymore for blue box). This could help reduce trash. If there are reduced fuel costs, there must be some reduction in carbon emissions.
That’s great news. I didn’t know that.
Hey, that’s Michael Sharbaugh quoted in the article, long time bartender at Sage.
If the county is getting rid of employees, can’t it start with a deputy chief operating officer for infrastructure? Sounds like exactly the sort of highly-paid middle management we can do without. I just got my 2d half bill for property taxes yesterday and, well, just wow.
I’d like for them to justify the use of consultants. I’ve got a sinking feeling there’s many instances where, instead of evaluating staff and making changes when the skills don’t match the job demands, they’re bringing in additional folks to compensate for it. Unless there’s a specialized need that only a few folks are qualified to fill, consultants shouldn’t be on the payroll.
Yes but in Dekalb, expanding the payroll is Job #1. You had Ga State do a very reasonable study concluding the county is overstaffed, and the current administration all but ignored it and then insisted that our taxes get jacked up by 23%. As just one example.
Speaking of recycling, has anyone heard whether Decatur was successful with it’s recycling grant bid? I think it was sponsored by Coca-Cola and was to include brand new herbie-curbie-like recycling bins for everyone.
I believe Decatur was successful. Lena Stephens would know.
No word yet on the Coke grant, according to Ms. Stevens.
What would make sense is weekly pickups during cool months and twice weekly pickups during summer heat. Also, a new push (with incentives) to get more people recycling could seriously reduce the need for frequent pickups.
I have lived in 8 cities in 3 states before moving to unincorp. Dekalb. All of those cities picked up trash once a week with no deleterious effects. No idea if it’s any cheaper but in one city, they would only pick up trash that was in trash bags that cost like $5 each. I think those who produce more garbage should pay more. What other service do we get where you don’t pay by quantity. If I use more electricity or gas or water I pay more, why shouldn’t I pay more if I use more landfill space?