RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTubeThe Dispatch wrote A stagnant economy and rising costs have put Columbus in a $75 million hole that has officials considering charging for trash pickup in 2009."There's no good news in this," Auditor Hugh J. Dorrian said yesterday as he released January-to-May figures on city tax and fee collections, which will frame early work on next year's city spending plan.
Dorrian warned that balancing next year's budget might require large-scale layoffs of city workers and deep cuts in city services. (Spending decisions ultimately lie with Mayor Michael B. Coleman and the Columbus City Council.)
A trash fee is a quick solution. Raising income taxes would require voter approval in a citywide referendum, but a new fee needs approval from only four of seven council members.
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Politics
Columbus' financial & budget news and updates
[40 posts] [18 contributors]
Topic Rating:
(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:
Rate this topic:
-
honavery
Arizona
Login to Send PM
Posted 3 years ago # -
drewtoothpaste
upper arlington
Login to Send PM
We pay $2.40 per can in UA and recycling's free... it does a lot to push people to recycle instead of throwing everything away. (Our cans are about half the size of the big green behemoths we had in the city.)
I know recycling ain't free in the city, but maybe this is something that could happen if we don't spend $100m on streetcars when we're $75m in the hole. :)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM
The $100 million for Streetcars would not be funded by the general budget.
It also would not be paid upfront, but instead over the course of around 25 years.
http://www.downtowncolumbus.com/development/docs/ColumbusStreetcarProjectFinancialPlan.pdf
It has absolutely nothing to do with the general budget crunch.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Mercurius
First Avenue
Login to Send PM
I say garbage fees are a good thing for a temporary budget fix. It has the added benefit of helping SWACO reduce trash in the long run. You could always add a few million to the bicentennial bond package and I don't think anyone would notice. Get testa to go more aggressive after the delinquent property taxes.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Motorist
The Trots
Login to Send PM
The only problem that I see with charging for trash and not providing free curbside recycling for everyone is that people are just going to start dumping illegally. And they'll probably dump illegally in lower income neighborhoods. And you know the city won't be rushing to pick up trash dumped in an empty lot in Franklinton or the Near East Side.
Posted 3 years ago # -
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM
i don't see why illegal dumping would occur, the city would still be picking up every residential customer's trash and charging every household anyways. if they let people opt out of paying for trash pickup that would be a mess so i don't think it will happen(the opt out)
Posted 3 years ago # -
jawjack187
Columbus
Login to Send PM
I think in relation to streetcars the question should be, "Why would you spend 1 dime of General Fund money on a streetcar project?" If the city is $75 million in the hole, why would 1 cent of general fund money be used to fund a study of a project that is not even guaranteed to bring in a windfall of cash if it is built? That just doesn't make sense. With this news today, Coleman's streetcar proposal looks even WORSE. It's like he wasn't even expecting this news. Was he not advised by the Auditor that this was in the works? Or even more troubling, was he advised on this, but disregarded the advice just to push forward with the project? This is a prime example of why you MUST have a legislative branch in government. It takes alot of courage to propose an idea like a streetcar when the city can't even afford to pick up its own trash, or keep its workforce at the same level from year to year. I am all for modern transit, but come on people...
Posted 3 years ago # -
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM
it's all built into the budget. govt never stopped progress because of deficits before, things must go ahead. when you stop moving you die.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Motorist
The Trots
Login to Send PM
lifeliberty wrote i don't see why illegal dumping would occur, the city would still be picking up every residential customer's trash and charging every household anyways. if they let people opt out of paying for trash pickup that would be a mess so i don't think it will happen(the opt out)
Walker wrote I don't think there would be a way to opt out. Wouldn't it most likely be built into property taxes? Is that how they do it in UA or is it a separate bill?
He said that it was a per can charge so I'm guessing that you only pay for what you throw away. It would kind of defeat the point of trying to get people to throw away less and recycle more if you had to pay whether you threw stuff away or not.
Posted 3 years ago # -
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM
I wonder if they have a 1/2 can charge because mine is never full, it's only at most 1/2 can
Posted 3 years ago # -
jawjack187
Columbus
Login to Send PM
[quote="lifeliberty"]it's all built into the budget. govt never stopped progress because of deficits before, things must go ahead. when you stop moving you die.
Please see federal budget before George W. Bush and federal Budget while Bush is in office.
Posted 3 years ago # -
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM
Posted 3 years ago # -
HeySquare
German Village
Login to Send PM
jawjack187 wrote I think in relation to streetcars the question should be, "Why would you spend 1 dime of General Fund money on a streetcar project?" If the city is $75 million in the hole, why would 1 cent of general fund money be used to fund a study of a project that is not even guaranteed to bring in a windfall of cash if it is built?
Since you are a new poster on this forum, you may want to consider reviewing some of the previous discussions on streetcars prior to derailing a thread relating to general budget issues.
http://www.columbusunderground.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=13705&start=380
Posted 3 years ago # -
SusanB
Hungarian Village, Columbus' fastest growing Gayborhood!
Login to Send PM
Motorist wrote:
He said that it was a per can charge so I'm guessing that you only pay for what you throw away. It would kind of defeat the point of trying to get people to throw away less and recycle more if you had to pay whether you threw stuff away or not.
I don't see how that will work for my neighborhood as that we don't have individual containers, just the big 300(?) gallon jobbies in the alley. We already have an illegal dumping situation with them. We have asked for the individual containers and were told "that it is too expensive". It seems that only the wealthier areas get the individual containers.
Posted 3 years ago # -
lifeliberty
Here
Login to Send PM
I doubt it's a 'wealthier' issue, my block uses individual bins.
i think would depend on how the trucks do the picking up, either in the alley or street. in my neighborhood it's the street. we have individual bins because no one would want the big garbage bins always in front of their house.
Posted 3 years ago # -
SusanB
Hungarian Village, Columbus' fastest growing Gayborhood!
Login to Send PM
On the South Side Merion Village gets the individual bins and everything south of that (read poorer) does not. I'm not saying that it has to do only with money but there is absolutely no physical difference between my street and 2 blocks up. The older trucks are configured to do the 300 gallon alley pick ups and the newer trucks do the individual containers.
Posted 3 years ago # -
hobbesOSU
West Side C-bus
Login to Send PM
joev wrote Why not charge for garbage? That seems like a no brainer.
Aren't we already being charged for garbage? It's just that they want to itemize the charge into a fee such that they can grow the size of the city government without having to put a raise to the income tax to a referendum vote.
IMHO, it's a ploy to soften the voters to an eventual raising of the income tax in the City. The ploy will be to drop all these added fees if we just raised the income tax. I predict a growing use of fees in the hopes that the citizens will feel nickeled and dimed to death, then the government will cry about how hard it is to administer all these separate fees and will say it's easier to just raise the income tax. At that point we'll all be paying 2.5% to 3% in tax to the city anyway so the citizens will agree. So, basically it's a politics as usual way to get the tax raise that is wanted and probably IMHO, needed.
I wish they were more honest and own up to the fact that to do what the city government wants to do, it's going to cost money. Don't mess around with the fee business. I don't mind paying local income taxes, it's the federal taxes I can't stand. The same way many feel about shopping/eating local is the same way I feel about taxes.
Posted 3 years ago #
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.