INC NEWS - yard waste and other solid waste issues

Mon Jun 4 06:50:17 EDT 2007

Tha's not true Randy. I favor an all user-tax based program.

-----Original Message-----
From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org <inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org>
To: bragin at nc.rr.com <bragin at nc.rr.com>
CC: inc-list at rtpnet.org <inc-list at rtpnet.org>
Sent: Sun Jun 03 17:46:59 2007
Subject: INC NEWS - yard waste and other solid waste issues

I've been away, so I missed this issue when it first reared its head.

But this last year marked the first time in the history of the yard waste
program that it funded itself. That is, those who wanted the service were
paying for it. That's why we saw several years of increasing fees as
adjusted itself. It has been stable at $60 since. And as far as I have
heard, breaks even as it currently is.

But if Solid Waste has their way, you won't have a choice when your
current yard waste enrollment expires. Under the recent plan Solid Waste
has put forth, EVERYONE will be charged a single SOLID WASTE FEE. It has
been set at $52 and some change. This covers green can, brown can, tin
can, and bulky waste disposal. One fee covers it all and it will be
mandated that all pay (no idea how that works for rental properties and
such). Sort of a Solid Waste Tax (SWT) I guess. Where once our green can
disposal was paid for from our property tax dollars, I guess it will now
come from the SWT... Or that is what I was lead to believe.

But there should be no reason for complaint from those currently enrolled
in the yard waste program; it reduces our overall fees paid by almost
$8/yr. So it gets cheaper for those of us who have supported the current
system. No mention of how carts will be distributed or charged. But carts
have been a huge budget item that has never been funded at adequate
amounts. Just guessing, yard waste carts for the rest of those not
currently enrolled would amount to $2M or more. So that's a big chunk of
change just for the carts (just to buy them for resale; that money, if
they are sold, would go back into the General Fund). I see this "one fee
covers it all" as just the beginning of what will continue to increase
year after year. Especially when Virginia passes its "trash tax" laws that
are currently in their legislature. See, VA is getting tired of everyone
hauling their trash to VA. After all, they're for lovers, not trash. They
have already shut down trash by barge to ports in VA and now the proposals
look to tax trash as it comes across the borders. That'll add between
$.25-$10.00 a ton depending what amount they pass. And this just sets up
yet more price increases down the road. So it's not going to be any
cheaper.

We find ourselves (our City/County) in a serious jam when it comes to yard
waste disposal as we once knew it. The State has new regulations that make
composting (as we once tried it) cost prohibitive due to the new
regulations. All of this started when we popped up on the radar after the
mulch fire. Since then, it's been tough and it'll continue to be tough. I
believe in the recent past we signed a contract for another $300K just to
keep our grinding operation going (for large tree/limb grinding into
mulch). As it is now, about all we can do is collect it... Everything else
has to be dealt with in a different manner than we once did. Things must
be so bad at the landfill, that I see where General Services has started
their own mulch pile operation beside their new facility. No idea if that
needs a permit as well...

As far as transporting yard waste in the same truck as domestic waste,
this is perhaps not as big of an issue as you might think. ALL of the
waste is packed in packing unit (compactor) so as to make the "package" as
dense as possible. You can easily make the front of a load (or the tail
end of a load) yard waste and there will be a distinct delineation of the
two when it comes to dumping them. They will be two distinct "packages".
The one truck doing them both isn't that far fetched if they're doing it
this way. If they're just dumping them both together (as in mixing them in
the same package), then as a governmental body, we are paying much more
(the same price actually) for the cheaper yard waste disposal than
necessary. It is costing us the same regardless of which waste stream it
is. And if that's the case, wouldn't you like to be on the receiving end
of all of our waste?  And if they're mixing it at the transfer station,
why not go to a "one can" system? I think federal laws regulate this, so
it can't be happening like you think (or at least I should hope not). It
has to be collected and disposed of differently. But getting it to
disposal in the same truck may just be a formality. As we have heard, it
saves some money. And two distinct packages on the same truck probably
does save an extra trip.

A much larger issue for me is our disposal of hazardous and household
hazardous waste. Currently, these noxious waste streams can only be
disposed of for a few hours on two days a week . This is insane. If we
don't get this "bad" waste into the solid waste system, it will end up in
our water supply sooner or later. It's easier to get rid of a stove or
couch in this community than it is to get rid of waste that could kill us
all eventually. And what kind of sense does that make?

RWP
27 Beverly

>
> For the nearly 80% of Durham households that do not currently
> participate in the yard waste program at all, that's not really an issue.
>
> for me the issue is why am i continuing to pay for a service that i'm
> not receiving?
>
> I already compost 75% of my yard waste. For $60 bucks, i can save the
> larger stuff and rent a chipper once a year to bring that up to 100%.
>
> Will i do that when my current enrollment expires? Damn straight i will.
>
> Barry Ragin
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rkitchin at aol.com
> Date: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:39 am
> Subject: Re: INC NEWS - INC-list Digest, Vol 29, Issue 28
> To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
>
>> Hello from the "delegate" who raised the question about yard waste
>> at this
>> week's meeting.
>>
>> My takeaway is this: we shouldn't mix our yard waste in with our
>> regular
>> garbage because when the program reverts to its most
>> environmentally friendly
>> procedure, we would have to "relearn" not to mix at the curb.
>>
>> I look forward to meeting Mr. Long at the next INC meeting.
>>
>>
>>
>> rkitchin at aol.com
>> Rosemarie Kitchin
>> President
>> Kitchin's Ink, Ltd., a deliberately low-profile
>> marketing services firm based in Durham
>> 6702 Glen Forest Drive
>> Chapel Hill, NC 27517-8647
>> 919/768-0749
>> 919/724-3723 cel

_______________________________________________
INC-list mailing list
INC-list at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20070604/8e88acea/attachment-0001.htm 