RSS | 
Twitter
| 
Be a fan!
Council at odds over collection increases
Staff writer
ttjohnso@observer-reporter.com
When rates for solid waste and recycling collections in Washington were raised six months ago, council said it was to meet the increase in the new contract with Waste Management and to recover money the city paid in 2007 and did not pass on to property owners.
Rate This Story:
1 the lowest - 5 the highest
Current rating:
Brenda Davis, who addressed council during a meeting Thursday, said the increase was too steep.
Davis, who lives in Canton Township and manages, but does not own, property in the city, claims the amount is $110,000 more than what the city needed.
Councilman Matt Staniszewski agreed, saying the "overcollection" was closer to $116,000 and quickly made a motion to refund each property owner $24.62 at the end of the year.
His motion died for a lack of a second.
Waste Management's contract with the city for solid waste collection was $480,216 in 2007 and increased to $545,535 in 2008. The recycling contract, also with Waste Management, was $57,780 in 2007 and rose to $119,528 for 2008.
As usual, Councilwoman Virginia Ullom was at odds with Staniszewski, whom she said did not look at all the expenses incurred by the city, including composting, picking up Christmas trees and leaf removal. The increase also is to help cover the cost of mailing delinquent notices and administration and code enforcement costs.
Ullom said in 2007, the total amount the city paid for collection was $650,226. That jumped to $788,598 in 2008.
According to Mayor Sonny Spossey, who also disagreed with Staniszewski, the city has 5,350 households with a 7 percent delinquency rate, along with numerous abandoned or vacant properties, bringing to about 4,700 the actual number of households that pay.
"We lost $56,000 by not charging enough last year," Ullom said. "We have to recover this money."
The city is attempting to avoid bankruptcy and to recover from a financial crisis.
Staniszewski countered Ullom, claiming the city is overcharging this year and money is being diverted from the city's neighborhoods. He also repeated he did not vote for the current budget that included a 30-mill increase in land taxes.
"Matt, you're just campaigning for the next election," Ullom shot back.
Ullom told Davis she called several surrounding municipalities and discovered that even though the rate increased by $25, the city still is the lowest when it comes to solid waste and recycling rates.
In East Washington, Ullom said, property owners pay $185. The annual rate is $222 in South Strabane Township and is $241 in North Franklin Township.
"To keep costs low, the city absorbed a $12.59 per unit loss in 2007," Ullom wrote in a summary presented to Davis. "The city can no longer absorb just some of the costs. Some of this loss has been added to the 2008 rate."
collection : 6/10/2008
The price last year was 125.00 not 150.00.
"Council at Odds" : 6/10/2008
"I love it",,,,,, Staniszewski, please continue to keep these socialists on their toes. This council is a buddy-buddy social event that needs cleansing for the recovery of the city. Staniszewski vs. Ullom and Spossey,,,,,,, where was the rest of the board? It appears that Staniszewski has been and continues to be a "lly in the ointment" when it comes to definning if is right for the city or right for the city to operate. The likes of Staniszewski IS what the city needs to break the dictatorship governing of the city. Warning to the "O-R" if you keep pandering to the council, you may go down with that sinking ship.
trash tax : 6/10/2008
Besides living in this "wonderful city," I have a rental house here also. These higher tax's(besides trash) are hurting all of us. Let alone my family and my tenants. The city is in a bad financial situation but DON'T take it out on us citizens that live here, play here, pay tax's here, and keep up with our property. This is a real unfair situation. Also, since Spossey came into office, he has the un-stopable code enforcement officer writing up anybody and everybody he can. That NEVER, EVER has happened before in this city. Now that's a crock-of-poo!
Collection : 6/10/2008
So what was the increase from???????? Was it $125.00 or $150.00????? The difference being 14% vs. 28%. It would not suprise me to find that the cost was $125.00 but the council misrepresented the "was" and the "O-R" reported it because they are in the commissioners front pocket.
city tax's : 6/10/2008
Spossey is just trying to get as much $$$ in as possible any which way he can. Either thru fines with "his" code enf. officer or with a "unfair" garbage charge. Hey folks, Spossey can't be trusted! Ps. Keep up the good work Matt S.
