2025.01.27 Speaker Card - PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Table 2. summarizes the increases from 2022 to those proposed for 2025. It illustrates how discrepant the rates have become over the three-year period, and that those who discard less than pay much more in comparison to those who discard more. Below are the more important findings of this three -year summary: • In dollars, rates for the smaller bins increase more than for the larger bins for this 3-year period $20.00, $18.00, $16.00, and for $12.00 for the 20-, 32-, 64-, and 96-gallon bins respectively. • The proposed rate increases from 2022 to 2025 are 105.9%, 51.6%, 24.9%, and 12.6% for the 20-, 32-, 64-, and 96-gallon bins respectively. Small bins see a much higher rate of increase • As cost per gallon of proposed 2025 rate compared to the 2022 rate the increases are $1.00, $0.56, $0.25, and $0.13 for the 20-, 32-, 64-, and 96-gallon bins respectively. Tables 1 and 2 display that rates for solid waste disposal impact customers with smaller bins much harder than those with larger bins. But that alone is not the problem. From Table 1 we know that costs per gallon were not equal across the board in 2022. Yes, the smallest bins saw the lower rate per gallon initially, but so did the largest. Over the years the inequities were change such that the smallest bins are charged almost double what the largest are charged per gallon of waste. Yet the costs moving waste in the service center and disposing (processing) of it are not related to the size of the bins from which it is collected, but to the overall volume. That is a gallon of waste from a 20-gallon bin costs exactly the same to process and dispose as one gallon from a 96-gallon Table 3. shows how the size capacities of the four different size bins compare to one another. The diagonal is blackened as there is no reason to compare cans of the same size. The entries above the diagonal display the percentage of capacity of the larger bins to smaller bins. Thus, 160% in the column titled “32” along the row titled “20” shows that the capacity of the 32-gallon bin is 160% of a 20-gallon bin. And in the column titled “20” the values 12, 44, and 76 reflect how many additional gallons the bins sized 32-, 64-, and 96-gallons when compared to the 20-gallon bin. For example, a 96- gallon bin is 480% of the size of 20-gallon bin; and holds 76 more gallons (480% of 20 gallons is 96 gallons and 3.8 x 20 is 76 more gallons). Reducing waste while encouraging recycling is an important for our environment. Rate structures should reflect that goal. For solid waste they do not. When a customer using a small bin is charge d $1.94 per gallon and another just $1.12 per gallon for a much larger isn’t promoting conservation. The City should be encouraging citizens to reduce waste and recycle more. The City recognizes that water conservation is important to the environment, and one way to encourage less use is to penalize by way of higher rates for those that use more. The water rate structure does that. Why doesn’t the solid waste follow the same rationale. We know that there are costs to the City and Recology to provide this service. I don’t pretend to know the details, but some costs are fixed while others depend upon the amount of waste collected/disposed. The City’s costs are mostly fixed. Each customer has an account for each residence, there are costs for the billing system, mailing bills, and personnel costs (salary, benefits, hiring costs, etc.) and likely others. Whether a customer has a 20- gallon bin or a 96-gallon bin the costs for maintaining an individual account are the same or nearly the same for Redwood City. Recology has similar fixed costs (facilities, personnel, and others).