Archive for Tuesday, June 12, 2012

City to consider mandatory trash carts

June 12, 2012


Lawrence city commissioners at their meeting today will be asked to move forward on a plan requiring residents to use city-owned trash carts instead of traditional trash cans or bags.

Commissioners will consider advertising for bids for 23,000 wheeled, plastic trash carts that would be distributed to households across the city.

City officials released many of the details related to the trash cart program earlier this year, but today will be the first time city commissioners will weigh in on the proposal. Here’s a look at key details:

• A 65-gallon cart would be the standard size issued to households. City staff members are estimating the 65-gallon cart will meet the trash needs of a typical four-person household, especially if the household recycles some of its trash. Households would be provided the city-owned cart at no additional charge.

• A 90-gallon cart would be issued to households that are having a difficult time fitting their trash into the 65-gallon cart. Households that choose to have the 90-gallon cart would pay $1 a month.

• The new trash system would allow households to place bags of trash at the curb if their cart is full. There would be no extra charge for picking up a bag or two, but the city has indicated it wants such activity to be the exception and not the rule. The memo proposes that route drivers and solid-waste supervisors keep a log of households that regularly set out bags of trash.

• A 35-gallon cart would be offered to households that believe a 65-gallon cart is too large. Staff members, however, aren’t recommending that households receive a price break for taking a 35-gallon cart instead of a 65-gallon version.

• The city would provide a program for a limited time to allow residents to recycle their old trash cans. The memo states several trash cart companies will take the old trash cans and recycle the plastic to use in new carts.

vStaff members are estimating 7,000 households will see their monthly trash bills go down as a result of the new program. That’s because about 7,000 households currently rent a trash cart from the city. Most rent a 90-gallon cart. Those households pay the city an extra $2 per month to rent those 90-gallon carts. The new system would charge $1 per month.

• The city is estimating it will cost about $1.13 million to purchase the 23,000 carts. The city previously has set aside about $1.12 million to upgrade the city’s trash system.


tyson travis 3 years, 1 month ago

It was probably mentioned earlier, but what about yard waste/trimmings? My family has several larger cans we use for this stuff in order to recycle biomass and keep it separate from household garbage, I assume we'd still be able to use these for a separate pickup. BTW, we take all our bottles, cans, newsprint, etc. someplace else to recycle in order to keep it out of the landfill.

JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

Thanks Cromwell. You are the worst city commissioner since the three amigos left in disgrace. Go back to ripping people off with "green energy" and leave governance to people with IQs higher than a solar panel.

irvan moore 3 years, 1 month ago

with all due respect to your opinion i really think he is actually worse than they were

Marc Mondi 3 years, 1 month ago

I used to live in Lawrence, but live in Des Moines, IA now. We have a standardized trash cart service in Des Moines, and it is great. It simplifies the trash service for the city, and makes it easier on the workers, as they are not having to physically lift different sized trash cans all day. Plus, the way the City of Lawrence commission is describing the trash service above (i.e., allowing for extra bags to be set outside of the can), that is great; in Des Moines if we have an extra bag, we have to pay an extra $1.25 / bag to throw them out. As for yard waste, Lawrence also has it made as well; in Des Moines we have to also pay $1.25 / bag to dispose of yard waste, regardless of how many bags you put on the curb. I'd quit your whining and look at the positive... better for the city efficiency, better for the worker's health/safety, safer for the city (i.e., no trash cans rolling all over the street), and basically at little or no extra cost then what you are currently paying.

JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

right, except there is nothing wrong with the Lawrence trash service as it exists now. In fact, it's one of the most, if not the most, highly rated city services. Which makes this entire ordeal, well, baffling.

JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

Basically what has been propsed is that we shoukd pay more for worse service. Only a true idiot could dream that one up (hint, see a current city commissioner mentioned above)

Joe Berns 3 years, 1 month ago

Why is LJW reporting the same facts, the same story, almost word for word, every other week? We've already seen this before and had a ton of comments on it. We get it, new trash cans are coming, the service is going to change, there will be 3 sizes, blah blah blah..

chzypoof1 3 years, 1 month ago

Because LJWorld is a mouthpiece for the commission. This is not "news", this is propaganda to help them push their agenda. I love living in this city, but I cannot STAND how a few people have all the power, supported by our "award winning" paper.

Sad state of affairs...


JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

in the case of this City Commission, they have accomplished little and made a cornucopia of questionable decisions that will negatively affect Lawrence for decades. It is reminiscent of the last Kansas legislative session, it's just lefties having their way with the populace instead of righties. Oy vey. What a time to reside in Lawrence, Kansas.

BlackVelvet 3 years, 1 month ago

Gee, if I wanted to live in Overland Park, I'd MOVE to Overland Park. Why does Lawrence seem intent on copying Johnson County ?

akt2 3 years, 1 month ago

Eudora has them. There was also a very recent death of a trash worker in the Kansas City area who was run over by the trash truck he was riding on. No need for them to ride on the back of the truck with a cart system. Jump into the current century and don't let the thought of a trash cart ruin your day.

JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

How many people get run over by empty buses?

JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

but, seriously, I think Lawrence should follow Eudora's lead on every city service where we can pay more for less. It's government at its finest.

somedude20 3 years, 1 month ago

This crap is just going to make MORE people dump their trash illegally in apartment complex dumpsters! Lawrence will need a "stand your dumpster" law so myself and others can ward off the evil doers who try to harsh our gig with their garbage!

Cant_have_it_both_ways 3 years, 1 month ago

Households would be provided the city-owned cart at no additional charge. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Does this mean that the cart manufacturer is going to give the city 23,000 carts for free? If not how can the costs of them not be rolled into this new "Service"?

JackMcKee 3 years, 1 month ago

Do you trust anything Aron Cromwell comes up with? Did you already forget the library misinformation fiasco? That was his baby too.

somedude20 3 years, 1 month ago

The Lawrence economy runs on alcohol sales that are generated by the cans and glasses that the bums fish out of the trash. If you stop feeding the bears, the bears start to break in your house looking for food (booze) since their supply was cut off

paulveer 3 years, 1 month ago

As reported here, nothing of substance has changed from original proposals as a result of all of the task force meetings. Also, nothing was changed due to public input, be it informal, such as comments here, or from official public comment sessions.
I suppose that the original proposals could have been so perfect that they could not be improved upon by input from such an intelligent board or an engaged public, but it all appears to be a sham to me, attempting to steer the public to very specific preconceived objectives. I hope that the discussion by the full commission will be more than sham, and actually take into account differing ideas and opinions.

paulveer 3 years, 1 month ago

Two questions in particular (actually, I have many) that I believe should be addressed in this discussion: 1. What research is available and/or has been used to determine the costs and feasibility of lowering work comp costs by training, strictly enforcing (existing) trash weight limits, tougher screening standards for potential employees for fitness, or even lowering the weight limit? 2. What research is available and/or has been used to determine the value of dollars spent out of the community (presumably to lower costs) on state of the art trucks, versus wages paid to local employees that will be spent and taxed multiple times within the community?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.