Archive | garbage franchise RSS feed for this section

Garbage deal stalled, city will give no details

11 Jul

City Mangler Mark Orme told us at the Local Government Committee meeting a couple of months ago that he would have a franchise deal with one or both garbage haulers “rolled out” by July. I expected the worst – a notice that I would be required to use Waste Management. My experience with Waste Management, both as a customer and a neighbor of customers, has SUCKED.

When the county rolled their deal out in the unincorporated areas, they got two weeks of phone calls, “off the hook”, according to CAO Paul Hahn – complaints about Waste Management, their lousy service, and their excessive new rates. Hahn was clear – the rates were for the county dump, which is starving for lack of business. But he had tried to get better service, and expressed frustration about trying to deal with WM corporate headquarters, located in New Mexico. He said they had no local office – oh, did he just find that out?  They were as rude to him as they were to the customers who were ringing phones “off the hook.” 

After this warning from Hahn, I’m assuming Orme has taken a new, more cautious approach in the city’s franchise talks, because I just got three-month bills on all my garbage accounts from Recology. When I e-mailed the city to ask about it, Linda Herman said, “As far as I know the consultant is still in negotiations with the haulers.  Once that is over, the decision to franchise will still have to go to the City Council and even if it is approved, the haulers would probably need several months to order containers, notify customers etc.  So there is no way that this will happen before September.”

Well, good. It better be an improvement over the county mess, or Orme will have some explaining to do. I’ll try to keep you posted. It’s frustrating to me how they expect to keep us in the dark until they decide to stick it to us. They didn’t learn that lesson from the county. 

Tags: ,

Talking heads discuss garbage tax

7 May

Yesterday I attended the Local Governments Committee meeting Downtown. I wasn’t able to stay for the whole meeting but stayed long enough to satisfy my curiosity about some issues I’ve been trying to follow. 

In attendance were county supervisors Maureen Kirk and Larry Wahl, Chico council members Mayor Mark Sorensen, Mayor of Vice Sean Morgan and better-never-than-late Reanette Fillmer. There were staffers from the city and the county, including county administrator Paul Hahn and city manager Mark Orme.

These meetings are for staffers to provide updates to representatives of various county and city entities of ongoing issues like the nitrate compliance plan and the garbage franchise.  They are open to the public and the public should try to attend – a good overview of what’s going on, shorter and more to the point than council meetings.  I’m sorry, I mistakenly said they are held monthly – it’s every three months, which is a good schedule, not too often, not too seldom. They include minutes from previous meetings so you can stay up on the conversation.

Yesterday Hahn and Orme both gave reports on their respective garbage franchise efforts. At the county, Hahn made it clear that the main concern is getting enough trash to keep the dump operating, so the franchise includes a provision that trash must go to the Neal Road Landfill. This was a question because Recology owns and operates a dump in Wheatland where they are currently taking Chico’s trash. Trash  from the county now goes exclusively to Neal Road. 

Hahn went on enthusiastically about how they need that money to modernize the dump. I’ve seen improvements at the dump the last few years so I’m willing to believe him. I also appreciate his frankness – he complained, and other county staffers like Bill Mannel complained about Waste Management. They said  their phones “rang off the hook” for about two weeks with complaints about the new trash service, “mostly Waste Management.” Waste Management has no call center in  California – you WM customers knew that already – it’s in PHOENIX! If you’ve had that problem with WM for years, maybe it’s a comfort for you to know they treated your $200,000/year County Administrative Officer like shit too.

And frankly, for an overpaid pencil pusher, Hahn is a very nice and approachable man, that kind of pisses me off. 

The county had  all  kinds of problems with WM, but the one that got people really upset was the change  from weekly recycling and yard waste pick-up to bi-monthly pick-up. After all these years they’ve been telling us we need to recycle and sort our yard waste, they cut service? I can’t believe they thought that would be okay – this whole thing is a Repo-Man grab between the county, the haulers, and the customers, fighting over nickels and dimes because the county is so desperate to keep the salaries paid. That’s why the dump has no money, the are management heavy out there. 

Another problem was private roads. Garbage trucks shred even  paved roads, so a lot of people in Forest Ranch and other rural communities don’t want them on their private roads. The haulers won’t go on a private road anymore without a signed release, they don’t want to be responsible for what their oversized trucks do  to private roads. Bill Mannel says there’s a conundrum here – if the county forces the haulers onto private roads without the release of liability, they will be legally responsible for the roads. But, county money cannot be used to fix private roads. This is also a problem in Chico – I have two private driveways shared with neighbors who bring trucks right up to my gate. I asked Orme about this and he pretended ignorance – there’s private driveways all  over Chico, do people know their rights regarding the damage these trucks are doing to their private property? 

It was refreshing to hear these people talk straight about the problems the average person has every day.  And we have no clout, we have to depend on these happy wanderers to protect us.  Talk about “up Shit Creek without a paddle.”  At least the county is not making service mandatory, they just want whatever trash is picked up to go  to their dump. I don’t think that’s unreasonable – ever follow a garbage truck for 60 miles up Hwy 70? That’s unreasonable. 

Chico City Mangler Mark Orme made it clear that the city’s franchise agreement is about money for the city of Chico. When I asked him if service would  be mandatory for city residents, he wormed  around (I’m going to call that, “Orming”), saying this was still in negotiation with the haulers. But he added, many municipalities require trash service, and the way he said it leads me to believe that’s what he wants. When I asked him about a subsidy for low-income, he said that was in negotiation too.

I wish  I were a lawyer, but I do know, if they try to shove mandatory service on us, they have to have the low-income subsidy,  just like Obamacare. 

I don’t like Mark Orme. He’s out for his own gain, he doesn’t give a crap about this town. 

After the garbage franchise report they went on to discuss a few other interesting topics – I’ll get back to you on those, time to get to work. 

Tags: , ,

Something slouches toward Chico – garbage tax about to become a reality

16 Mar

I’ve been trying to follow the garbage “franchise agreements” at both the city and the county for over a year now, so it’s frustrating to all the sudden see people bitching and moaning, just as the deal is about to become done. The county has announced their new rules – you get the hauler they choose for you, and like me, a lot of people who have had nothing but problems with Waste Management in past have liked the service they’ve had from Recology, and they’re not taking the switch laying down.

When residents of Forest Ranch showed up at a last minute meeting called by District 3 super Mo Kirk, they were mad they hadn’t heard anything until now. Kirk told them it had been in the agendas – that’s going to cost you in 2018 Maureen.  I hope you realize, you just lost a lot of votes in Forest Ranch, a lot of them only having realized who you were about two weeks ago. Now they know, and they won’t forget to vote.

 I’m in the city, also in Maureen’s district, but I’m waiting for the details to come out about the city’s deal – Chris Constantin has been refusing to answer my questions, saying it’s still in the works. One thing he has told me is that service will be required in the city limits – you will have to either sign up with the hauler they hand you or you will have to get a permit to haul your own garbage – that’s if they approve of the vehicle you’ll be using.

The county, according to Paul Hahn, is not requiring residents to sign up for service. It may be a requisite in Paradise, where they signed a deal with Northern Recycling and Waste Services that significantly raised rates. I’ve asked Constantin repeatedly – where are the plans for a low-income garbage subsidy? If the city is going to require that we sign up for garbage service – including those of you who have been sharing service with a neighbor – then they must have a plan to subsidize low income households. No, I’m not a lawyer, I’m a decent person, and that’s what decent people would do.

My family has shared with our tenants for years, and we have a lot of friends and neighbors who find this to be a solution to “all those trucks in the neighborhood.” I’ve also known and heard about people who’ve made agreements with their neighbors to select the same hauler. I’ve heard from a lot of people who got together with neighbors over problems with Waste Management service, and switched as a group to Recology. I’ve told  Chris Constantin I had problems with WM for years before switching to Recology, and I want to stay with Recology.

It’s time to make noise people. If you are unhappy with this deal, I’d recommend writing a letter to the Enterprise Record or News and Review. Follow it up with a letter to council. CC Mark Orme mark.orme@Chicoca.gov  and Chris Constantin chris.constantin@Chicoca.gov

Letter: Taxpayers should be wary of Chico garbage deal

POSTED: 03/06/15, 5:30 PM PST |

3 COMMENTS

Taxpayers should be wary of Chico garbage deal

I do not want the same folks that negotiated the union contracts giving city firemen $200,000 a year negotiating the city’s garbage rates. When was the last time city negotiators had the taxpayers’ best interest in mind? I can’t remember any.

This isn’t Hemet. Chico taxpayers know the real reason for “franchised garbage” is so the city can bank the six or seven figure “franchise fee” from the haulers. The fee is really a “garbage tax” because the ratepayers will pay it every month in fees. As is typical, the tax will be squandered by the city to pay their exorbitant salaries and benefits.

City streets were designed for firetrucks, garbage trucks and empty city busses. The streets are falling apart because of the lack of routine maintenance. Cracks in asphalt have to be sealed, which is cheap preventative maintenance, otherwise water gets in and the freeze-thaw cycle breaks up the asphalt. There is no money to seal the cracks because we are squandering millions paying city firemen three times what they are worth.

If city streets necessitate the garbage tax, let’s dedicate every cent of the franchise fees as additional funds for street maintenance, in addition to what’s already being spent. Ha, ha, that will never happen.

As always, private enterprise would better serve the taxpayers than city control. There are already reports from the county that rates have doubled since the county adopted “franchising.”

Everyone will see who the real tax-and-spend liberals on council are with this one.

— Bill Smith, Chico

Something’s malodorous about new garbage deal

On March 1, new trash hauling rules began for the citizens of Butte County. Three waste hauling firms were granted hauling services by zones. The three firms are Waste Management, Recology, and Northern Recycling Waste Services.

Last August I switched from Waste Management to Recology since the three other homeowners on my four-house cul de sac were using Recology. Having an extra-heavy waste hauling truck breaking up our privately owned road made no financial sense, so I went with Recology to limit the heavy truck damage to our road.

At that time Waste Management was charging $58.27 for three months service while Recology was charging $68.07. Now I’m forced back with Waste Management at a price of $102.52, almost double the prior rate.

And if that isn’t enough of a kick in the head, they only pick up recycling every other week instead of weekly. I’ve no option but to put recycling in the weekly trash pickup every other week.

To coin a phrase, “Something’s rotten in Denmark.” This situation has a corruptive odor.

— Steven K. Sterzer, Chico

Tags: , , ,

Newer Entries →