It’s too soon to trash a proposal to charge for residential trash pickup in Denver, but not too early for backers to explain their zeal for the idea.
As The Post’s Jeremy P. Meyer reported last week, a panel charged with realigning Denver’s income and expenses is looking favorably at the prospect of a trash fee that would save the city $26 million annually. In fact, several members made it seem like a fait accompli. One said it “will be one of the biggest things to come out of this task force.” Another termed the idea “a no-brainer.”
The task force will present its recommendation in November, but they’d do well to start the PR campaign now.
Debate over a trash fee is one of the few things in Denver that approaches a quarterback controversy or a parking-meter rate increase as far as intensity.
In looking to close a budget gap in 2009, council members suggested charging for trash pickup. The idea was shot down by then-Mayor John Hickenlooper.
At first blush, it’s easy to imagine that a majority of residents would oppose paying a fee for trash collection, which historically has been paid for out of property taxes. But this time around, the idea is not exactly some one-off to respond to a recession. It’s part of a broader examination of revenues and expenditures in hopes of closing the $30 million “structural deficit” that grows every year.
During his campaign, Mayor Michael Hancock told us that before enacting fee hikes, officials must “make sure there’s a detailed analysis of where the problems are in the city and make sure that we’re covering the basic mission of government.”
We have no doubt Hancock will maintain that view as the city considers the task force’s recommendations. He stopped short of endorsing the trash fee last week, but seems more accepting of the plan than his predecessor.
Hancock told The Post that the best concept in the marketplace is the “pay as you throw” model. Those programs charge for trash based on weight, but provide free recycling and composting as a way to reduce what’s directed toward landfills. (The reality, of course, is that recycling and composting are not “free,” and trash fees are used to subsidize those green ideals.)
The task force is also looking at recommendations to reduce expenses. But it’s clear that cuts alone aren’t enough and, beyond trash service, various other taxes and fees are being considered, including:
• Doubling the Occupational Privilege Tax to raise up to $32.5 million. That hits fewer residents in the pocketbook, but does it make Denver less attractive for business?
• Creating a separate library district, with its own tax. That plan could save the city $30 million annually, but district taxes would cost the owner of a $200,000 home $56 each year.
• Indexing fines and fees to inflation. Such a move would generate an estimated $4 million annually, but that means today’s $25 parking ticket could be $30 in five years.
• Reducing fire stations. That gets you $1.5 million, but what does it do to response times?
The real question before Denver residents is not, “Will you or won’t you support paying for trash pickup?” It’s, “What does government cost, and how are you going to pay for it?”
