Backyard trash pick-up. Should this continue?

The jumping off discussion area for the rest of the Deck. All things Lakewood.
Please check out our other sections. As we refile many discussions from the past into
their proper sections please check them out and offer suggestions.

Moderator: Jim O'Bryan

Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »

Stephen Eisel wrote:Shelly, it is really hard to follow your last post...

Ok :oops: Maybe I have over researched this issue. But I felt like an opinion should be based on fact especially when we are talking about an elimination of a valued service and the gambling on an investment of this magnatude.

So perhaps I have gone to the extreme in getting the truth and facts (belive me you do not know the half of all I have contacted, and am in contact with) But I feel it is warranted if not from our elected officials, then at least the residents whos money after all will be used for this 2.5 million dollar experiment and whos valued service will be terminated seemingly just to promote an agenda.

My point: Where is the Proof Automation will work?

I have given you proof that it is not a decision based on finances, nor out cry of the pubic that they are dissatisfied with our current system or customer service from our refuse workers, nor anything factual or provable.

"So "faith" you may have. But wheres the proof? And where is the fault in those I quote, who are after all, the experts?
Paa
Kim O'Connell
Auditor of State ......"

Wheres YOUR PROOF? :P
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Post by Stephen Eisel »

It also adds to fuel costs due to the fact that Automated equipment cycles approximately 700 to 1,200 times a day. In comparison, manual loading trucks average a mere 200 cycles per day.
If the size of the Lakewood Garbage truck fleet was decreased because of the new trucks then less fuel may be needed by the city.
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Post by Stephen Eisel »

Wheres YOUR PROOF?
Remember, I have faith :lol: :lol:



I keep on finding articles like this.. very neutral...

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/co ... ml?sid=101
Other trash haulers are exploring creative ways to save.

Columbus uses automated garbage trucks with mechanical arms to empty trash bins, which has reduced costs because the city doesn't need as many drivers, said Mary Carran Webster, assistant director of public service.

In the past, the city has weighed suggestions to streamline collection by having residents line bins along only one side of the street.

"That could save on fuel, but there's a risk factor involved," Webster said. "How do you tell someone on Henderson Road to dodge traffic? So we kind of rejected that."

Columbus uses biodiesel fuel in all its garbage trucks, which can be costlier but is gentler on the environment.

Rumpke Consolidated Cos. schedules its collections during low-traffic times, said spokesman Jonathan Kissell. "We can do the routes much quicker and won't be sitting in traffic a long time," he said.

The Cincinnati-based company has contracts with many central Ohio suburbs, including Bexley, Dublin, Gahanna, New Albany, Powell, Reynoldsburg, Westerville, Whitehall and Worthington.

Rumpke is investing in new automated trucks that cut down on service time. It also relies on a computer program to map out the most-productive routes for drivers.

In Lancaster, sanitation supervisors are reworking routes to maximize efficiency. They're also asking drivers to limit engine idling, said Paul Martin, superintendent of the Lancaster Sanitation Department.

"Our fuel is 3 to 6 miles per gallon on a truck," Martin said. "It's pretty bad."

He has read in trade magazines about pioneering cities such as New York that are experimenting with natural gas-powered garbage trucks.

"That, I think, is the biggest way that we're going to be able to save money," Martin said.
Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »

Stephen Eisel wrote:
It also adds to fuel costs due to the fact that Automated equipment cycles approximately 700 to 1,200 times a day. In comparison, manual loading trucks average a mere 200 cycles per day.
If the size of the Lakewood Garbage truck fleet was decreased because of the new trucks then less fuel may be needed by the city.
The added fuel usage would eat up any savings Steve. :cry:

But you are on a positive track!

We should be looking at natural gas,"It costs about 40% less to use and has lower emissions." We don’t need a study, cities all over the Nation are already using natural gas. Cleaner air and a quicker return on our investment-a novel idea."

That would be a savings and have a definite return on our investment! And really would be "Green" unlike the automated trucks.

You should tell your friend about natural gas and its guaranteed impact on our budget!
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Post by Stephen Eisel »

The added fuel usage would eat up any savings Steve
If Lakewood went from 10 garbage trucks to 5 automated garbage trucks then maybe there is a big savings.... MPG is a factor. But! You must also consider. The new garbage trucks will probably cut the amount of time that it takes to pick up all of the garbage in Lakewood..
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Post by Stephen Eisel »

Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »

Stephen Eisel wrote:
The added fuel usage would eat up any savings Steve
If Lakewood went from 10 garbage trucks to 5 automated garbage trucks then maybe there is a big savings.... MPG is a factor. But! You must also consider. The new garbage trucks will probably cut the amount of time that it takes to pick up all of the garbage in Lakewood..
Not with our unique street configuration and on street parking, our lack of room on both sides of our drivways, our...
"The automated pickup system does presume standard frontage size, which Lakewood doesn't have. It also presumes a minimal amount of on-street parking, and we know how THAT'S going to work."(Whiteline, Lakewoodbuzz.com)

:shock:
Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »

You know what’s sad about our exchange Steve?

Seems like you and I have spent a lot more time researching these issues then our elected representatives and the many many other residents who are silently siitting by as their services are being gutted and cut. :cry:

And whose city is irrevocably losing her uniquness and undeniably losing her heart. :oops: :cry:

Can not wait to spare with you on the few other issues I am currently investigating. You are keeping my research through and my vision sharply on the facts and that which can be proven. 8)
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Post by Stephen Eisel »

more hope/ faith :lol: :lol:

The Lakewood scenario would be a bit different..

http://trailer-bodybuilders.com/mag/tru ... ed_refuse/
Paying for themselves
Those up-front costs appear less daunting when the overall costs are examined. Automated systems pay for themselves through the savings they generate. For example, Longmont, Colorado, spent $5.1 million to automate its system in 1999 and completely recouped its investment by the end of last year. According to Heil, the cost of service to each household also is reduced by about 25%. Those savings come from:


Reduced labor. Labor usually is the largest component of collection budgets. Switching to fully automated collection dramatically reduces the number of workers needed, frequently dropping from three workers per vehicle to one. Beyond that, improved efficiency leads to a reduction in the number of vehicles and crews needed, with the workers frequently moved to other positions.
Fewer injuries/reduced workers' compensation claims. Manual refuse collection is physically demanding. Heil says Longmont spent almost $500,000 on workers' compensation claims in a three- to four-year period using semi-automated collection. Contrast that to claims of $1,000 the first year after moving to a fully automated system. On-the-job injuries are rare because operators rarely leave the truck cab of an automated refuse collection vehicle.

Lower insurance rates. Workers' comp insurance premiums decrease as worker classifications and responsibilities change from driver/laborers to operators. The city of Thornton, Colorado, reported that its injury costs in the first year of operation dropped to zero and workers' comp insurance premiums dropped more than 60%.

Less overtime. Eliminating injuries reduces the need to use co-workers and pay them overtime or hire temporary workers.

Less fuel used. Reducing the number of trucks can slash fuel needs.
More households
Moving to an automated collection system increases the number of households served per worker per hour by up to 300%, according to the Environmental Protection Agency's 1999 study
.
Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »


Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Post by Stephen Eisel »

Shelley Hurd wrote:You know what’s sad about our exchange Steve?

Seems like you and I have spent a lot more time researching these issues then our elected representatives and the many many other residents who are silently siitting by as their services are being gutted and cut. :cry:

And whose city is irrevocably losing her uniquness and undeniably losing her heart. :oops: :cry:

Can not wait to spare with you on the few other issues I am currently investigating. You are keeping my research through and my vision sharply on the facts and that which can be proven. 8)
Posting in this thread has been both fun and educational. Shelley, you have made many good points in this thread.. I do share many of your concerns about this project.. I know that we both just want what is best for Lakewood...
Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »

Stephen Eisel wrote:
Shelley Hurd wrote:You know what’s sad about our exchange Steve?

Seems like you and I have spent a lot more time researching these issues then our elected representatives and the many many other residents who are silently siitting by as their services are being gutted and cut. :cry:

And whose city is irrevocably losing her uniquness and undeniably losing her heart. :oops: :cry:

Can not wait to spare with you on the few other issues I am currently investigating. You are keeping my research through and my vision sharply on the facts and that which can be proven. 8)
Posting in this thread has been both fun and educational. Shelley, you have made many good points in this thread.. I do share many of your concerns about this project.. I know that we both just want what is best for Lakewood...
You are right !

My hat is off to you Steven, you have stated your points and position without being malicious or being snide. And I have tried to show you the same respect.
If I came off catty at over some points...it was not intentional, had my hackles up a few times. Meow :oops:
Gary Rice
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 9:59 pm
Location: Lakewood

Post by Gary Rice »

Time for that banjo again! :lol:

Shelly and Stephen have truly demonstrated the BEST that this 'Deck has to offer!

Different opinions, yet respect shown, kindness expressed and consideration extended to the other side!

Wow, I LOVE this town, I LOVE this 'Deck, and I really appreciate everyone trying to do what's best for this city.

Hopefully we'll go easy into these new things, contract-wise. Far too often, shiny new ideas end up tarnished by cash-flow realities.

Still, as this thread has shown. together we can do whatever it takes.

Lakewood, the best of the holidays to you!

Kumbayah indeed. :D
Gary Rice
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 9:59 pm
Location: Lakewood

Post by Gary Rice »

Sorry Shelley, for mis-spelling your name!

Where's that edit button? Jimmy, Jim? JIMMMMMMMMM! :roll:
Shelley Hurd
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:15 pm

Post by Shelley Hurd »

Tonight Council will vote on the Budget.

Knowing that the Mayor and some Council members lurk about this site I will make yet another plea that reason and diligences are used in the decisions they make tonight.


Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that automation service will work smoothly in Lakewood.
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that Automation will not over complicate our lives
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that the city will become noticeably cleaner
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that they will not attempt to outsource the refuse collections at least until the 5-10 years pass that they state it will take to show a noticeable return on our investment
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that they will not use the refuse department as an excuse in a year or two to increase taxes
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that the full range of services we now receive will continue
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that no refuse fees will be assessed for bulk item disposal
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that parking fines will not be imposed for parking too close to a can
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that they will not be charged for lost, stolen or damaged cans
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that restitution for all damage to residents vehicles caused by the automated trucks will be made promptly and without complication
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that this “Greenâ€￾ imitative will have a positive impact by a discernable decrease in emissions
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that refuse automation is more “Greenâ€￾ then converting the city fleet to natural gas
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that refuse automation has a better return for our tax dollars then converting the city fleet to natural gas

Lakewood residents deserve all of these Guarantees from the Mayor and Council backed by legally binding sworn affidavits that they will immediately resign their posts and remove them selves from office, if any of these guarantees are not upheld and or realized.

Whether the Mayor and Council look at he refuse workers as assets or liabilities, we residents think of them in terms other then human capital. The service they provide to us is superior to any other city, less costly and yes VALUED by Lakewood residents


Gambling away our tax dollars on an experiment during the “worst budget crisis this city has ever facedâ€￾ should come with at least and minimally the afore mentioned guarantees. If the Mayor and Council are so sure they are right and so positive this is what’s in the best interest of the residents of Lakewood, there should be no inequality. The Mayor and Council should put something of there’s on the line to lose along with the rest of use.

If they are not so sure as to gamble with anything that they have worked hard for… then they need to address real cost cutting ideas with guaranteed returns for Lakewood.

Or better yet, maybe the Mayor and Council should wait to play like tax dollars are nothing more then “Monopolyâ€￾ money. Maybe the Mayor and Council should wait until this Budget Crisis has passed to play “Are You Smarter Then a Fifth Graderâ€￾ .

The only “gameâ€￾ any elected official should be permitted to play in these uncertain economic times is “Truth or Consequencesâ€￾. Just like the rest of us
Post Reply