DECISIONS PENDING ON CITY TRASH FEES WON'T BE POPULAR

Like a spoke on a spinning wheel, the issue of residential trash fees has come around again for the citizens of Cape Girardeau and their city council. Faced with mercurial mandates from the state and federal government -- and their associated rising costs -- council members are considering a $1.46 a month increase in the current $10.54 monthly trash fee. While some have criticized the council for its continual tabling of this issue, we see little harm in the deliberation, particularly where it comes to the options of volume-based billing and possible privatization. Ultimately, however, a difficult and unpopular decision will have to be made, one that is driven not by local inefficiencies but outside restrictions.

Possibly, the lingering dissatisfaction with solid waste disposal fees, bubbling up each time an increase in citizen payments is sought, has to do with the path the city has taken to its current situation. You don't have to be too old to remember when trash was torched in a backyard receptacle. Our society was less wasteful in those days, and concerns for the atmosphere were less enlightened. Thus, the city got in the trash collection business. Until the mid-1980s, Cape Girardeau used federal revenue sharing dollars to help pay for its solid waste program, and there was no residential collection fee. When federal funding was phased out by Washington, voters in Cape Girardeau approved (in August 1986) a measure that called for a residential garbage pickup fee of $4.85 a month. Subsequent increases came in 1989 and 1991.

We don't blame citizens for being a bit taken aback by the new call for additional fees. Moving from no trash collection fee seven years ago to what might become $12 a month is a steep escalation. (With the proposed increase, the cost breaks down to 40 cents a day.) In addition, the city has subsequently changed from two full pickups a week to one full pickup plus a recycling pickup. Asked to do their part, the citizens have a right to feel they have responded in good faith ... and now they are asked to pay more. It is understandably discouraging.

But, just as the burning barrels became a thing of the past, so too has the idea of each community having its own landfill for the burial of its own debris. More stringent environmental regulations, without any accompanying means to pay for their implementation, have been forced upon cities. The cities have no choice but to abide by the laws; in arranging the financing, officials can trim here and cut there, but finally there is a realization that the costs must be spread among the citizens.

The city council appointed a Solid Waste Task Force to evaluate the alternatives in this trash dilemma. The task force is made up of citizens no more interested in paying higher trash fees than the rest of us. However, in studying the issue very closely, the group recognizes the inevitability of paying more in order to keep the solid waste program from growing deficits.

With regard to the options being explored, we see a number of strengths and weaknesses. Our inclination in most cases is toward privatization of governmental services. However, we are not so quick to jump on the bandwagon of the giving over the residential trash business in Cape Girardeau to a private hauler. The city has made a significant investment in refuse disposal, including trucks, equipment and personnel. What happens to this investment if the trash service goes private? If the equipment is sold and the personnel turned loose, the city forfeits its bargaining power with a private hauler, which is then free to escalate its prices to customers. (We trust the assessment that Cape Girardeau does not have the population to attract competing trash haulers that would keep prices in check, any more than Cape Girardeau has the market size to attract more than one cable television company.)

Even bidding the service to see what prices might be offered would have its drawbacks. A low price presented to the city would only put public pressure on council members, who know that the next environmental decree could trigger an escape provision in a municipal contract and allow the price to creep higher.

The volume-based billing idea has some merit, with lesser users of the program being allowed to pay less. This might also encourage recycling, which Cape Girardeau has already done an exemplary job with. Unfortunately, it might also encourage people to deposit some of their trash in other people's dumpsters. And, the luster might come off this idea when the majority of citizens learn they are not in the category of people who use the system least and that they might have to actually pay more than the $1.46 increase now on the table.

The solid waste program in Cape Girardeau must remain viable within the context of the city budget. Sure, there could be a few police officers or firefighters or inspectors trimmed to offset the rising costs of solid waste management, but we don't think that addresses the problem; in fact, it would only create other problems. Sure, the federal and state governments might stop handing down burdensome new environmental regulations, but we're not holding our breath on that. In the meantime, the city council must deal with the sticky issue of how best to dispose of trash and how best to pay for this disposal. The decisions that are pending won't be popular.