180613-nrr-transfer-01

Ron Stottler of Winston throws refuse into the trash at the transfer station in Roseburg in 2015.

The Douglas County Board of Commissioners Wednesday unanimously rejected rate increases for depositing trash at the landfill and transfer sites. The increases were recommended by the county’s Solid Waste Advisory Committee.

That doesn’t mean fee increases don’t lie ahead, but the commissioners said they didn’t favor the fee system SWAC had suggested.

SWAC members voted last month in favor of a fee schedule that would charge a minimum $12 fee for individuals disposing of trash at the landfill or transfer stations.

The current rate schedule is $3 per can. The $12 charge would have applied to people bringing between one and three cans. Each yard of trash, equivalent to about four cans, would have been $16 under the plan, up from $12 currently.

Commissioner Chris Boice, the liaison to the solid waste committee, said it’s more efficient for the system to encourage people to dispose of higher volumes of trash at a time, but he felt the SWAC proposal was too punitive.

“What I would rather see is a system that is more of an incentive in nature. In other words, we would rather incentivize folks to get where we want to go rather than punish them for not doing that,” he said.

He suggested that people bringing one can be charged $6. Two cans would be $5 each, or $10, and three cans $4 each, or $12.

He also said the SWAC’s upcoming community meetings next week would make it easier for the committee to come back with what he said would be a better proposal.

Commissioner Tim Freeman said for him the SWAC is one of the county’s most frustrating committees, and that the direction he’d like them to take never gets considered. Because of that, he said, he’s voted no on every franchise hauling agreement that’s come before the commissioners except for one that reduced the rates.

He said more times than not it’s cheaper for people to have the franchise hauling business covering their area pick up and dispose of their trash than it is for them to individually haul their garbage to a transfer station, and he said the fees should reflect the actual costs to the system.

“We blend those two things together as if they’re the same thing. That is a mistake,” he said.

He noted it had been part of the culture for decades for people to bring a single can to the landfill or transfer station and dispose of it for free. But that’s because the landfill was supported by federal timber revenue that’s no longer coming to the county. Now, he said, it’s supported by fees.

He suggested a simpler system than Boice proposed, with a $12 minimum but a 50% discount for a single can.

Commissioner Tom Kress said he thought it was very appropriate to wait for public input before approving new fees.

“Hopefully by listening to the public and maybe listening to these folks we can have that discussion and go forward with something that works for everybody,” Kress said.

The SWAC community meetings next week will also address the issue of whether some transfer stations should be closed. Boice said the idea is unpopular, but people need to either pay the actual cost to deposit trash at those stations or reduce the number.

SWAC will hold community meetings at 6 p.m. Nov. 12 at the Oregon State University Extension Office Auditorium, 1134 SE Douglas Ave., Roseburg; at 6 p.m. Nov. 13 at the Yoncalla Community Center, 400 Main St.; at 6 p.m. Nov. 14 at the Javelin Ormond Community Center, 62 NW Pine St., Canyonville; and at 6 p.m. Nov. 19 at the Marina Activity Center, 263 Marina Way, Winchester Bay.

Reporter Carisa Cegavske can be reached at ccegavske@nrtoday.com or 541-957-4213.

React to this story:

2
0
0
0
3

Senior Reporter

Carisa Cegavske is the senior reporter for The News-Review. She can be reached at ccegavske@nrtoday.com or 541-957-4213. Follow her on Twitter @carisa_cegavske

(1) comment

American

At the upcoming meetings with SWAC and the County Commissioners, I hope they will be scrutinizing the reasons WHY the rates need to be increased so soon after initiating them. I'm talking about a thorough examination of the reports that detail the breakdown of expenses currently, and what EXACTLY they're anticipating for in the upcoming budget that requires an increase in fees. First, current expenses: how much monetary waste is built into the system now? How can things be streamlined and made more efficient, so that operating costs can be more tightly managed? Second, does the upcoming budget have 'wish list' items in it? If it does, whether for new equipment or more personnel or whatever, they need to address whether or not these things are ABSOLUTELY necessary at this time, or if they can make do with repairs on existing equipment, and hold the line on existing personnel expenses, replacing only workers leaving their employment and not expanding the workforce (which is one of the most expensive line items in any business, what with wage increases, benefit packages, etc). Here's an idea: plenty of other county services have cut or curtailed due to lack of funds, and volunteers have stepped up to fill the void. Seems to me we have plenty of people who aren't working who could 'volunteer' as part of a jobs training program for rehabilitation, or a public works program to offset the cost of public assistance (welfare) programs, etc. Offer a job to one of the panhandlers around town asking handouts...after all, 'anything helps'. We'll see if a job is 'anything' to them.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.