Lakewood Refuse & Reclycling Initiative -Thou Shall or $

Richard Baker · Post by **Richard Baker** » Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:45 am

Whatever ever happened to city government using simple politeness like please and thank you when communicating with its citizens? I returned home this weekend and read a directive, rather than an explanation of a new garbage pickup and recycling procedures, that reflects a city governmentâ€™s attitude of supremacy and a threat of fines to the good citizens of this community. Donâ€™t misunderstand me, Lakewood has long been behind the curve with recycling and Iâ€™m a proponent of taking the garbage out to the street to save collection expense butâ€¦..

Like the taxes we pay to support this â€œgovernment for the governmentâ€, Lakewood was excessive with â€œthou shallâ€ in this flyer and not once did it contain a request for the cooperation of the citizens in making the changes a success in the community. In addition the City avoided some general guidelines to the exceptions of normal residential waste. Iâ€™m sure we all have a questions like, how do we put a stove or dishwasher inside a 96 gallon garbage can, how do we cut a 10 inch round tree trunk into 6 inch diameter log, is lumber waste cut at 18 inches long or is it considered a branch 4 feet long, what is a manageable bundle, and what is the maximum size for a single item acceptable without a $100.00 fine. Even from their lofty perch, it obvious to us mortals the city canâ€™t answer ever possible condition, but a few simple guidelines for the exceptions would have been informative.

The tree lawns are really going to look attractive with all the little plastic bags lying around and newspapers falling apart due to rain. I especially liked the explanation why they are not using blue or green recycling bins since most cities provide them to make it simpler and encourage recycling. Perhaps the expense for the bins was the real reason or maybe the City will need the monies to hire garbage police to enforce an recycling ordinance that relies on the communities good will and cooperation rather than directives and threats of fines to be successful.

Speaking of expenses, everybody should review their tax assessment notice carefully to ensure it reflects the decrease in their current property value due to the current economic conditions.

Gary Rice · Post by **Gary Rice** » Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:02 pm

Richard.

Well said.

Your one-size-fits-all point about this trash business can be taken even farther though.

For those who do not receive a daily paper, or use cans or bottles much, I wonder whether those people will have to buy a can of pop a week, just to have something to put out there in a blue bag?

Gary Rice · Post by **Gary Rice** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 6:30 am

I also wonder, since the city seems to be using recycling as a money maker, just how coercing people to do it, might apply to the 13th amendment of the United States Constitution?

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction"

It's not the recycling that's wrong, but rather a government attempting to coerce people into involuntary servitude for free, under threat of sanction, that just leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.

To me, it's just a case of good intentions gone awry.

I think this could probably be contested on those grounds, and I think that it certainly should be.

Heather Ramsey · Post by **Heather Ramsey** » Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:39 pm

You will NOT be fined for putting out NO recycling. If, when they pick up your trash, there is a lot of recyclable material in it, they might leave you a note or something. Then, if you still do it, they'll not pick up your trash until you sort it out. THEN if you never sort it out, you'll get a fine. It will not be a matter of "Oh, that house didn't put out any recycling, time for a fine".

Gary Rice · Post by **Gary Rice** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:49 am

If indeed, Heather is correct, all of this begins to boggle the imagination.

Opening every bag of garbage, or every other bag of garbage, or using x-ray, see-through vision, or whatever...has got to take time.

Lot's of time...

The speed that they are having to do in order to collect garbage these days should make ALL OF THIS this an interesting dichotomy.

I would not want to pay anyone, out of my taxes, to examine my neighbor's garbage. Heck, if YOU AND I examined our neighbor's garbage, they'd probably haul us away.

It would also invite security and privacy issues with local municipal employees rummaging through residents' tossed out papers or private medical stuff without having court orders to do so.

The city could find out quite a bit about people from their garbage.

Granted, secure items should be secured prior to tossing, but often aren't, particularly with the elderly.

This is getting patently ridiculous.

Is this REALLY the sort of society that we want?

dl meckes · Post by **dl meckes** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 7:33 am

Heather Ramsey wrote:You will NOT be fined for putting out NO recycling. If, when they pick up your trash, there is a lot of recyclable material in it, they might leave you a note or something. Then, if you still do it, they'll not pick up your trash until you sort it out. THEN if you never sort it out, you'll get a fine. It will not be a matter of "Oh, that house didn't put out any recycling, time for a fine".

As an avid recycler, I find this completely unfathomable and appalling.

Missy Limkemann · Post by **Missy Limkemann** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:03 am

my biggest question is like Gary's. How will they know what is in my garbage? Does the new truck come with x-ray vision too? And it is the middle of April, when are our new dumpsters coming?

Charlie Page · Post by **Charlie Page** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:15 am

Gary Rice wrote:If indeed, Heather is correct, all of this begins to boggle the imagination.

Opening every bag of garbage, or every other bag of garbage, or using x-ray, see-through vision, or whatever...has got to take time.

Lot's of time...

The speed that they are having to do in order to collect garbage these days should make ALL OF THIS this an interesting dichotomy.

I would not want to pay anyone, out of my taxes, to examine my neighbor's garbage. Heck, if YOU AND I examined our neighbor's garbage, they'd probably haul us away.

It would also invite security and privacy issues with local municipal employees rummaging through residents' tossed out papers or private medical stuff without having court orders to do so.

The city could find out quite a bit about people from their garbage.

Granted, secure items should be secured prior to tossing, but often aren't, particularly with the elderly.

This is getting patently ridiculous.

Is this REALLY the sort of society that we want?

In all reality, the worker who is helping to align the 96 gallon container to the one armed bandit will probably just open the container and look to see if there are any obvious recyclables present. If he can't see impressions of cans or bottles in the bag, he'll give the container a shake or two and listen for cans or glass.

If you throw away anything with more sensitive information than your name and address (which is everyone) you should buy a shredder.

Heather Ramsey · Post by **Heather Ramsey** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:21 am

That's probably exactly right, Charlie.

I really don't see what the big deal is, here.

If you already recycle, there's no change.

If you don't, you should be, and it's not that difficult.

Everyone has plenty of time to complain about taxes and government spending and whatnot, but can't take a few minutes to recycle to save some of those tax dollars from paying for waste disposal (/earn some money back from what we recycle)??

Gary Rice · Post by **Gary Rice** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:53 am

Just musing about all of this, a few more questions came to my mind.

For example:

If the city wanted to add something extra to a job description, (in this case, adding a law enforcement component to rubbish removal job) I would certainly wonder about whether and how those charged with that extra law enforcement duty would be compensated for that duty, and how their supervisors would measure whether that job was being done? Would they penalize employees if too few tickets were written, for example?

Further, I would be interested in the present laws governing law enforcement, and how they would apply here...Would the trash collector be making some kind of "citizen's arrest" legally, with a citation, or would they have to call in a police officer to write it? Or would they have to become sworn officers of the court, writing depositions and all?

Or would they need to become "real" law enforcement officers, and have to take courses etc...

I, for one, would hate to charge a fellow citizen with some sort of crime without having some form of liability protection for myself in place.

That could also mean that employees might need to be released from work duties, in order to testify in court..

This whole "coercive" thing would seem to open a whole big can of police-state worms, to my way of thinking....

Repugnant in the extreme to me.

It's the only think I can think of, that would stink worse than the garbage itself.

And yes, Heather, there are a lot of "shoulds" in this world. "Shoulds" about bad habits, "shoulds" about many things.

There are many constructive and persuasive ways that we can and do work to change peoples' behaviors...to lessen the need for that "should" word.

It's when those "shoulds" turn into "YOU VILL DO THIS" that lines start to be crossed....

dl meckes · Post by **dl meckes** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:18 pm

Who wrote the policy? Who moved the policy forward?

Stan Austin · Post by **Stan Austin** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:10 pm

The "who" in charge would be the Mayor.

Gary Rice has raised some very reasonable scenarios and examples of what every resident might face every day along with garbage day. Also, he has raised some fundamental legal issues from the viewpoint of a non lawyer.

Because of their basic and elemental simplicity, the issues he has raised have merit.

The Mayor, having ultimate approval over these changes, and-----being a lawyer should have an answer for each of these potential situations.

I would also have to presume that a protocol has already been created which should be shared for community review and comment.

Also, I would expect each council member would jubilantly jump at the chance to go door to door and personally explain the new system.

Perhaps council members should look to school board members as a model as to how to engage the community.

Stan Austin

Stan Austin · Post by **Stan Austin** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:33 pm

By the Way----------(btw for all you texters)

Since most of the changes in trash pick up, disposal, and recycling, are based on content of the trash picked up, I would naturally assume that there is a content analysis of trash in Lakewood. Specifically, a random total content analysis of trash on a typical block.
By this, I mean that a refuse truck is pulled off a route after a block, its contents analyzed as to types of trash. Is it recyclable? How much and by what type? What are the most cost effective types of recycling based on tipping fees as compared to current scrap prices, alternate methods of disposal such as composting, and cost of remaining life of equipment compared to new equipment.
I have to assume that the due diligence has been performed as indicated above and the results of which can easily be posted forthwith.

Stan Austin

Diane Helbig · Post by **Diane Helbig** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:57 am

Somehow I missed the notification - was it on the back of the waterbill? I don't read the water bill.

ANyway, I'm with Gary on this one. How does the government decide to fine me for not doing something I should do - recycling?

I do recycle. Sometimes my kids forget. Am I going to be fined for that? REALLY?

I'd love an explanation - not from Heather - but from city council and the mayor as to how they justify this idea. And please, hear me when I say I BELIEVE IN RECYCLING.

I just don't believe in this kind of government. I feel a line being crossed here. A scary one.

Brian Pedaci · Post by **Brian Pedaci** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:41 pm

Are you putting recycling out every week? If so, then do you really suspect that garbagemen are going to be going through the automatically-collected trash and determining if there's additional recyclable material in your trash?

It's more likely that, over time, they'll notice certain addresses are not participating in the recycling and escalate from there. There should be efforts to inform and educate before fines are levied (as they currently do with improperly disposed-of items). Please refrain from dreaming up fascist nightmare scenarios until you've clearly thought through what is the most likely, efficient means of promoting the highest percentage of participation.

It would be nice if a representative of the city would make it clearer exactly what the process would be (if they've even thought that far ahead).