Curb Side Recycling - Is it really "No Cost"?

Weekly curb side recycling is returning to Euclid.

The October 4th City Council meeting saw a 5-3 majority pass Resolution 178-10, authorizing the resumption of curb side recycling, and Ordinance 179-10, authorizing a 92K purchase from City Capital funds of a recycling truck.

For long time Euclid residents, you know that at one time we had curbside bins, then central dumpsters at the Lakeland Service Garage/City Hall, then back to curb side blue bags and now our current system of using dumpsters in the City of Cleveland.

The Difference Today - Tonnage (Or the Weight of the Trash)

The City's current trash collection contract is partly based on the the amount of tonnage that
is brought to the landfill. The less tonnage Euclid dumps, the less it should cost the tax payer. For that reason alone, any program that diverts paper, plastics, metal cans and such

helps our bottom line and helps the environment.

Many of you already recycle (I do). Some may even compost yard clippings (I do also). As you all know spring grass in particular heavy! That's tonnage we can divert from the landfill. I urge each and everyone of you that don't recycle now, to do so, and to tell your neighbors and friends to join the effort

Why I voted "No" on this recycling idea.

Reason #1) Paying for the program. The Administration's proposal included hiring three City workers at a total cost of $123K per year along with the 92K purchase of the recycling truck. In the past, curb side recycling was always cut because of budget issues. So, how does Euclid afford the new salaries? It all hinges on how much trash we keep out of the landfill. According to the Mayor, and the Cuyahoga County Solid Waste District, we only recycle now about 2600 tons per year. We have to hit at least 4000 tons diverted to save enough money per year to equal the salaries of the new workers. Low tonnage equals money out of our general fund.

Reason #2) No Education Program: How do you get people to recycling? Develop a good recycling education program! No plan was presented by the Administration. With a good program, I am confident that Euclid can hit the 4000 ton recycling goal.

Reason #3) Where is the Consortium? The Mayor indicated that our recyclables would be sold

either via a suburban consortium, or via the City of Cleveland. By selling the recyclables, Euclid might realized a small return on the glass, plastic etc. collected. As of Oct 4th, the Administration could not answer which way Euclid would go; offered no agreement to vote on and, had no idea of how many communities would be a part of this consortium.

Reason #4) No Pay As You Throw: "Pay as You Throw" is a program of trash disposal and
recycling where the resident is charged based on the amount of trash generated. Used in many communities across the country, the Administration refuses to even look at the idea. Councilwoman Minarik is continuing to explore this idea.

Reason #5) Poor use of EECBG Grant: What is that, you ask? Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant, a federal block grant that the City received in 2009. This block grant

"empowers local communities to make strategic investments to meet the nation's long term goals for energy independence and leadership on climate change (www..eere,energy.gov/wip).

In short, investments in energy efficiency, alternative energy, and new technologies saves money and lessens our dependence on fossil fuels. It is designed to encourage longer term investment. Instead, out of the 196K grant, this Administration is using 123K for 3 new hires to pay for their salaries for one year.

The Mayor claims this is a good use of the grant money, that it costs the tax payers nothing. Nonsense! Everything has a cost, no decision we make is free.

By spending 92K from capital on the trash truck, that means some other vehicle is not bought, or

some other street is not paved, fewer trees are planted, etc. By using the EECGB grant on salaries we lost out on the opportunity to:

Install solar panels at other City property such as the Ice Arena, Service Garage or Golf Course. Such installations, combined with our current City Hall solar project, would save Euclid hundreds of the thousands of dollars over 30 year life of the solar panels.

Pay for Shore's new boiler: an investment that will save 15% per year in natural gas over the existing boiler. (Instead we used our own capital monies)

Grants like EECBG should be used to leverage investments that saves the community money.

Instead, this administration is using the money on a one time, one year salary payout on a program that at best will break even.

Reason #6) Recycling was rammed through. From the Mayor's first proposal to passage on Oct 4th, was about 3 weeks. The Sept 22 committee meeting to discuss the proposal left many questions unanswered and raised even more. The Mayor and Council majority refused to have any other committee discussions: would not consider changing how much of the EECGB grant to use on salaries; refused to consider Pay as You Throw." Why won't the Administration answer legitimate questions? Why were so few answers given? Why did the Mayor continue to state that the program "has no cost?" What was the rush? All this is unknown.

Curb side recycling can be a fine program for Euclid. What passed on Oct 4th was not a program, but rather an idea lacking many details; lacking consideration of how to make it work, or consideration of it's true costs.

You should expect more from your government!

Thank you for reading, and, let me know what you think.