Contributor Opinion By Art Stigile: Trash Is Truly Cash
Oct 15, 2009 6:30 - 19 Comments
>Remember the Great Trash Debate of 2007? Remember the group of determined Hungerford residents who called themselves Rocktrash and trooped down to each Citizens forum for 5 months to prod certain Council members to come to their senses and support once-per-week trash pickup? Remember the gloom and doom forecasts by opponents of the new trash system? Remember the promise that trash fees would be frozen for 5 years, if the once-weekly system were implemented, and the derisive response from a few noisy naysayers? Remember the vote by Council members Marcuccio, Robbins, and Dorsey against once-per-week service? Remember the November election and the December vote to reverse the previous decision and approve implementing once-per-week service?
It seems like a long time ago, so let me refresh your memory. The vote was 4-1. Mayor Susan Hoffmann voted yes, as she had the entire year before, and newly elected Council members John Britton and Piotr Gajewski supported her, just as they promised during the debates. Why, even Anne Robbins jumped on board and supported the motion. Council member Phyllis Marcuccio was the only vote against it.
I mention this subject, partly because the next election is approaching. This is our only opportunity to hold our elected leaders accountable for their votes. But I also bring it up because the once weekly trash system has now been rolled out to most neighborhoods in the City, and the financial results are in. It’s time to celebrate!
For the entire year, the Refuse Fund ran a surplus of $508,443. The numbers come from the 4th Quarter FY 2009 Financial Report prepared by City Staff for this past Monday’s Mayor and Council meeting. (See page A-8 of the report, which is posted on the City website here.)
Folks, this is a significant achievement! It’s not just a success. It’s a resounding success. The budget projected a small $2,000 deficit. Instead, we ran a $500,000 surplus! Expenses are down across the board, far more than projected, and in areas like personnel, which indicate that a lot of the savings are permanent. And we’re selling recyclables to the tune of about $10,000 per month. If this had been a horse race, and you had bet your money on the Rocktrash nag, you’d be rolling in dough right now.
In 2007, City Staff estimated that total annual savings from once weekly service would be about $1.4 million, which works out to an annual saving of about $100 per year per household, once the system is fully implemented. That’s a permanent savings, year after year after year. Now I’m wondering if the savings weren’t underestimated. The FY 2009 surplus amounts to about $40 per household.
I’ll stop crowing after a big thank-you to folks who had the good sense and resolve to seize this opportunity, and make Rockville City Government more efficient and save us money. Some folks like to talk the talk, but the real McCoys walk the walk. So hat’s off to:
- My friends and neighbors from Hungerford who piloted this program for a year and a half and fought against all odds to save it for the rest of the City. You know who you are. Take a bow.
- Mayor Susan Hoffmann, who fought the good fight in the previous Council and passed it in this Council. Take two bows, Susan.
- Council members John Britton and Piotr Gajewski, who promised to support and made good on their promise. Take a bow, guys.
- Larry Giammo, I hope you read this because this was nothing without your leadership. Take a bow, and come back for an encore.
- Council member Robbins, who roughed it up at first, but had the courage and wisdom to change her mind. Take a bow.
- City Staff, who did outstanding analysis. Take a bow.
Folks, I like trash. Trash is truly cash.
Art Stigile
Hungerford
This is a contributor opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such opinions for consideration — the more voices the better. We especially welcome people who disagree with us. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!
Follow on Twitter
Bravo, Art, for carrying on the good fight so well (for so long) and for posting the results for everyone to see. Thanks also to the folks in Hungerford (my friend Diane among many others) who overcame their aversion to public speaking to come out and testify in favor of once-a-week pickup, which the rest of us now benefit from.
I am sure many remember the Great Trash Debate, but how many remember the Great Trash Compromise? This was the 2007 campaign promise made by then mayoral candidate Hoffmann and endorsed by Hoffmann supporter Stigile. Art Stigile, the man who said the compromise met the needs of all residents, take a bow.To see what the STINK was all about, go to this RC url….http://picasaweb.google.com/bradrourke/2007ElectionMailers#5120119861922162498
I’ve been a big support of once-a-week semi-automated trash and recycling since I first heard of the idea, simply because my family was already only using trash service once a week. That said (and please don’t take this as an endorsement of any particular candidate since I’m still undecided) I feel Councilmember Marcuccio had some good points when she voted against it. In fact, Mr. Stigile’s letter brings up a very good point: how did a $2,000 projected deficit for the new program turn into a $500,000 surplus? Surpluses aren’t a bad thing, I think we’ll all agree, but this means the City was off in its estimate for the once-a-week trash policy by half a million dollars. How did >that happen? Were there changes made to the program after it was approved that generated the additional savings? Or was the original estimate just a shot in the dark?
Now don’t get me wrong, I would have supported once-a-week trash even if it meant a small or medium projected deficit for the project, but that half a million savings that miraculously occurred could have just as easily turned the other way and resulted in a $500,000 deficit.
My point here is that, from my perspective as a semi-ordinary citizen, the whole Rockville budget process is starting to feel like a rodeo, where you do your best, hold on tight, and hope the bronco doesn’t buck you off until you have a respectable time. When I see a $500,000 surplus for a $5 million program, or talk of taking a $180,000 hit to the parking fund when there’s no evidence that Town Center’s new parking fee structure was actually hurting merchants, it’s really starting to look like the City is favoring swift action on highly publicized issues rather than careful, deliberate government that looks fully at the consequences of its actions. I hope the next Mayor and Council, whoever they may be, will try to reverse this trend.
The trash issue has elevated to be political again. No doubt the City provided some cost savings. Projections are difficult because of all the factors involved. I am sure if I had all the figures and variables, I could show a different projection.I was in favor of once-a-week trash pick up. It was always the COST PROJECTIONS that concerned me. My first point is that I still have a problem paying $32.50 a month because I generate less trash than most people. Now with the bigger refuse bin, I can go two weeks before rolling it to the curb. It makes no sense to roll it out when I only have one small bag of trash per week. The refuse crew should love me and all those with little refuse or recycle material.My second point is the City refuse crew’s work is easier now because the trucks have lifts. Every resident does not roll out their bins each week like me. The twice-a week service was great for those large families who generated a lot of trash. I see those families still generating more trash than their bin can hold.My third point is there are still people who think our trash pick-up is free. I had a person recently tell me that she would like to live in Rockville because we have “free” trash pickup. I corrected her immediately and told her I believe my trash pick-up service is expensive and I can not opt out. Unrelated to trash, I have actually talked to people who do not pay attention to the extra FEES on their property tax because they believe they have NO voice in the decision. How true it is!! It is good that some citizens and some City Council Members care enough to speak up and represent the SILENT majority.There are always two sides to each issue or concern. Everything is not always positive and I like to have all the true FACTS. It is expensive to live in Rockville and that is a fact
You’re right, Nick, making a budget is about predicting the future, which is always hard to do, even when you a long history of program performance. It’s true of government budgets, just as it’s true of your family budget. It’s especially difficult when you are trying to estimate the costs of a new program. You use the best data and reasonable assumptions, and sometimes you even have to make guesses. Then, no matter how well we plan, the unexpected happens. I’ve often heard that you always add 50% to the cost of a home renovation project for that reason.Budgeting is as much of an art as a science. Families and governments that do this best are the ones who do it conservatively, year after year, to minimize the size and number of bad surprises, while not way overshooting on the good surprises. Plus, they have use methods, like savings or reserves, to handle surprises. Rockville’s budget is a great example of a well-planned, conservative budget. I suggest it often as an example to delegations visiting from other countries. Not only do we have a balanced operating budget, as required by law, but we carry a minimum reserve of 15% of revenues. Currently, we even exceed that requirement by about $3 billion. And when the State grant cut hit, staff recommended, and Mayor and Council agreed, to rebalance the budget by spending reductions and delays, instead of tapping the reserve. Pretty impressive stuff, which partly explains our Triple A Rating. I can’t say enough about the high quality of the work done by Rockville’s financial staff.So, I’m delighted to see that the trash program is even less expensive than we originally thought. Is there any reason to hope it would be more costly? Aren’t we’re always concerned that Government costs too much? In this case, we — and I mean everyone who gets trash service — and the City staff turned the popular image of government on its head and achieved a rare miracle. Let’s celebrate!
Yikes Art, your federal government affiliation just shined through…. That would be a three MILLION dollar surplus last year, not three BILLION. (Hey, if we had three billion, we would pay off the garages [free parking for all!], replace all water pipes immediately, buy all vacant lots for parkland and suspend all property taxes for the next decade .)
Budget FormulationI agree with much of what Art writes. However, he also knows formulating a budget starts with prior year spending. You try to spend as much as you can because that will be your base and then you request for an increase. New projects and fixed expenses are added when necessary. The decision makers approve the increases or decreases after receiving the proposed budgets. Adjustments are always made either up or down. If a mandate is given to cut, the budget staff is required to readjust the figures. It is normal procedure in the Federal Government. Example, programs are cut to fund the war and positions are reduced to save money. Many times the dollar figures simple moves around from one category to another.Rockville spent approximately $90 million on the Town Center Development and each year there is more new expenses for the project. COLAAll social security recipients and government employees are not receiving a cost of living allowance increase. It could have been approved if the decision makers voted different. My point is the decision makers have the POWER to decide how our money is budgeted and spent. The present City Council was not conservative in their decision making procedure. Specific guidance needs to occur early in the budget process. Property TaxAnother point I want to share is one my sister-in-law told me the other day. She said they protested their property tax (they live in the Chicago area) and they were given a rebate of $500.00. That makes our $100 credit sound very low.TrashNo matter what process is used, I believe I pay too much for my trash pickup. Cost comparisons were provided from other jurisdictions and the cost was less.No Celebration I never celebrate when I believe my taxes can be budgeted more wisely. I am living on a reduced income since retiring. Montgomery County taxes are high enough and I don’t always see the benefit of the extra city taxes when compared to living outside the city limit.
COLAs – Fed “Retirees” are the ones not receiving the COLA. Employees do not receive a COLA, they receive an annual raise dictated by ….well, nobody really knows for sure.Anyway, fed retirees and SS recipients all got NEARLY 6% last year. Also, there is no COLA this year because the CPI is NEGATIVE. Who wouldn’t love a system that gives you a raise on a defined-benefit pension when the cost of living goes up, but takes away nothing when the cost is flat or goes down?How can they afford to have such a system? They can’t. That’s why FERS was created.
To me, this Contributor Opinion reads more like a political endorsement for the current Mayor and the two incumbent City Council candidates and an indictment against the candidate who is opposing the Mayor. To be frank, for me, this Contributor Opinion borders on the edge of this Blog’s policy of not endorsing candidates for election; to me, this Contributor Opinion endorses three candidates who are running for election and condemns the candidate who is running against the incumbent Mayor.A lot of things can be done with numbers to make them look good or bad, when you do not have all of them in one place. For instance, does this surplus, for which we are supposed to celebrate, consider that the sale of recycled material has been very good, which perhaps no one could have forecast. That, in itself, would make the surplus numbers look good. Also, was the start-up cost of the new bins factored in the surplus? Regardless, in this Contributor Opinion, we do not have all of the numbers, in an issue, which has a lot of numbers attached to it. So, this is another reason that I find it hard to celebrate.When I read this Contributor Opinion, published so close to Election Day, and it praises three candidates who are running for office and “blasts” the candidate who is running against the incumbent Mayor, it gives me a feeling that I am trying to be manipulated. This feeling, I have, of trying to be manipulated is regardless of how I am going to vote on Election Day, and it does not feel good.
Thanks for the comment, John. I wanted to respond and clarify how Rockville Central approaches opinions and elections. {seesmic_video:{“url_thumbnail”:{“value”:”http://t.seesmic.tv/thumbnail/eQ3DBknriP_th1.jpg”}”title”:{“value”:”Thanks for the comment, John. I wanted to respond and clarify how Rockville Central approaches opinions and elections. ”}”videoUri”:{“value”:”http://www.seesmic.com/video/F62dRPz7T9″}}}
To Brad in #10,Thank you for publishing my Reply and responding to it. If I understand you correctly, anyone can submit and have published a civil Contributor Opinion that is openly are in favor of a political candidate and openly not in favor of another political candidate, and Rockville Central will publish it. Also, Rockville Central actually even hopes that people will submit these types of Contributor Opinions. So, if I understand you correctly, if I submit a civil Contributor Opinion that outlines why I believe people should vote for a political candidate and not vote for his/her opponent, Rockville Central publish it. Is that correct?
John, there have been many comments posted by the campaign manager of Phyllis Marcuccio, who never posted using his real name or gave his identity–even when I asked him about it. Then he started using his name, but never said he was running her campaign. Maybe you didn’t see those. If you’re sensing an endorsement, but I’m seeing fairness and an open discussion. A contributor opinion is not an endorsement as it wasn’t written by either Cindy or Brad.
As Brad has said in his video comment, Rockville Central, Brad Rourke and Cindy Cotte Griffiths won’t be endorsing any candidates. We’ll leave that job to the local newspapers.A little history — the first Contributor Opinion was about voting for candidates back in 2007: http://rockvillecentral.com/2007/09/contributor-opinion-along-the-lines-of-peace-making.html/When it was written, we knew we needed to distinguish between news and opinion, so we posted it in a different color and the Contributor Opinion was born. So yes, if a piece is well-thought out and civil, providing facts and information, but it also includes an opinion about a candidate, we will consider it for publication. In some cases we might edit the piece but we would inform the Contributor of any changes before posting.
John, you are right that we solicit contributor opinions from all. I can’t promise ahead of time that we will publish everything we receive, but we very, very rarely have ever had a significant problem with a submission. We will sometimes work with an author to help clarify their points, but they always approve what is published over their name.
My comment is about the article Cindy (#13 above) referenced.http://rockvillecentral.com/2007/09/contributor-opinion-along-the-lines-of-peace-making.html/I remember well that Frank Anastasi had a bone to pick with me because he didn’t like my stand on a development proposal when I served on the Rockville Planning Commission. We disagreed and there is no other way to put it. I will remember he was Brad’s first contributor on the Rockville Central Blog.In the 2007 candidates’ debates Piotr Gajewski also questioned my record on the Rockville Planning Commission as Frank did on the Blog. That is what politics is about. Some interpret it as an attack.I am comfortable with how I voted on development applications and stand by those votes with reasons. I don’t believe I attacked any candidate and always try to defend my opinions. I don’t hide behind an agenda. I stand with dignity.Running two campaigns, one in 2005 and the second one in 2007, I learned a lot about people. Mostly the people I met were kind and sincere, but there are a few that disappoint me. This year I am supporting a new Rockville City candidate, Mr. Waleed Ovase who I believe will represent Rockville well. In fact, I believe he will bring a fresh new attitude to the City Council. Mr. Ovase is very smart, is quick to see the whole picture, and is very politically astute.I was attracted to Mr. Ovase’s enthusiasm as he runs for City Council. I am sharing with Mr. Ovase all the experiences I gained when I ran for Mayor and for Council. I first met him at one of the Rockville Central luncheons, where I offered to be his treasurer.Mr. Ovase is running a grassroots campaign with very little money. It is his sincerity, honesty, hard work and enthusiasm that are proof of his character. I am glad he is a Rockville City Council Candidate. I hope he gets elected.
I am generally in favor of the once a week program. I am not sure if I am convinced that automated system saves money. These numbers do not really tell me if it has been successful or not. It does say the majority of the surplus is do to reduction of refuse dump fees but it is not clear if that has anything to do with this new program. It is also worth noting that the actual numbers listed for 2009 are for 6/30/09 when the FY runs through September. So if I understand that correctly there may not be a surplus at all we just do not have the full year numbers yet.Refuse Fund Expenses2007 4,680,7202008 4,852,9172009 5,095,952 (actual as of 6/30/09)So it seems that the expenses have not gone down but continue to increase. This could be due to training or new equipment. It is of course also effected by population growth. The new program is not even fully implemented yet. It is appears to me that it is simply too soon to tell. I certainly hope it is successful as a resident of Rockville.The numbers I used are from these documents… http://www.rockvillemd.gov/government/budget/fy2010/adopted/fy10-adopted-budget.pdf http://www.rockvillemd.gov/government/budget/fy2009/adopted/fy09-adopted-budget.pdf
Mike, one correction — Rockville’s fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30, like most other State and local governments, so the 4th quarter numbers that I cited are, in fact, for the full year. I suspect you were thinking about the federal government’s fiscal year, just like I was thinking federal when I said billions instead of millions (see Councilmember Gajewski’s correction above). It’s hard for me to keep the zeros straight. I’m used to thinking of $100 million as $0.1.Also, I think the key number in the report is the $238K drop in personnel expenses, since it’s probably permanent. The drop in dump fees is probably at least partly related to the recession.
Thanks Art – for reminding me of the folks who fought for the new refuse program. I remember how mad I was when it got overturned by virtual fiat, how foolish I thought Rockville looked, and how happy I was when it was revived. I love the new program and am glad for the savings. Timely reminder as we head into the election…
I haven’t seen the savings. I pay $32.50 a month. I was for the change to once-a-week, but expected a reduction in my cost.We all see the issue from different sides. That is ok.