Published: January 30, 2007 10:58 am            

Time to take action on new garbage system

It has been 13 months since we called for the Clinton City Council to begin the process of converting to an automated waste collection system as a way to save homeowners time and money.

Yet just a few weeks ago, Water Quality Superintendent Gary Schellhorn spoke to the City Services Committee and asked for some indication of the council’s thoughts on the topic so he can complete his budget work for the 2008 fiscal year.

As the situation was presented in early December 2005, there seemed to be no doubt about which choice was more logical:

“Option one is to continue with the status quo, allowing the fee for curbside collection to climb and elevating the price of garbage stickers currently required for each bag of trash. Under this scenario, the monthly cost for an average family of four would be as much as $23 in 2012.

“Option two is to move to automated collection. The city would buy garbage cans for each residence in town. Homeowners would be able to fill the can each week, roll it to the curb and the garbage truck would automatically pick it up and dump it in the back. No more garbage stickers, no more city employees injuring themselves hopping from trucks and tossing 40-pound bags over their shoulders, no more outrageous insurance premiums because of the inevitable workmen’s compensation claims.

“Option two carries a monthly cost of $12. For families of one, families of four — $12.”

Now, same as then, it seems the choice is obvious. So why the collective dragging of feet?

At the committee meeting, At-large Councilman Ron Mallicoat said “everyone is going to automation,” and explained that the current traditional method of garbage collection leaves the city open to continual workmen’s compensation injuries.

Both very good points. So where’s the action?

Schellhorn said making the switch now would allow the city to buy an automated truck, rather than the more costly option of buying a standard truck and retrofitting it for automation.

Again, automation could save money. So why not?

Schellhorn added his department could keep a 1998 truck currently in service running for another two years to save funds if there are plans to switch to automation by then, and he added the overall costs of automation actually are less than manual collection.

Hmmm... status quo, more expensive. Automation, less expensive. What are we missing?

Hopefully, Schellhorn will include the conversion to automation in his budget. And while it may come to Clinton later than we’d have liked, the sooner it happens the more money will be saved in the long run.

Council members have, in the past, given occasional indications of support for making the switch. Yet there has been no formal vote that would let both Schellhorn and the public know the city will be moving in this direction, when it can be expected and how the change will be made.

There are council members who understand why this is a good thing for the future of Clinton. It’s time for those people to act on those convictions.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.