Trash talk

You never know what is going to generate some chatter on the blog. Of course trash talk always seems to get people going, however it is usually in the nature of hype "trash" talk. Still, nice to see people thinking about it.

I realize many consider curbside pick-up to be a matter of right.  There was a period of time when I for one wouldn't even entertain the thought of charging in any way shape or form for rubbish pick-up.  My thinking at that time was based on the fact Fairhaven's unique deal with its disposal site, and ability to sell its excess contracted capacity was generating a "profit".

That profit has been lost due to a number of factors beyond the Town's control.  first, the old contract expired.  Competition for "trash" has intensified, i.e. disposal sites are vigorously competing for the treasure they see in your garbage. Tipping fees as a result have plummeted.

Enough of the digest lesson in garbage economics. Suffice it to say we are once again paying more to get rid of the stuff than we bring in selling our excess capacity.  

Suffice it to say also that as time goes on, more and more people will be warming to the concept of pay as you throw, pay as you go and pay as you need it.  If we actually do these things right, it will be a benefit to everyone.

First and foremost, we will have to resist the the temptation to take every single dollar of savings to the general fund and dump it back into salaries.  Sorry, but I for one am not going to support a legal end run around prop. 2 1/2 simply for that purpose.  

Now I am not so naive as to think some of the savings will not be used for that purpose.  You can lament the fact that any of it will be used that way. Reality is what it is.  My goal however would be to insure that there is some additional benefit to such a program.

Suggestion (note suggestion, as this is a thought process on the fly so to speak), 50% of all money freed up from the general fund be dedicated toward capital improvements. Fixed costs and salaries are each year eating up more and more of the present revenue stream.  We have to dedicate money to maintaining the physical infrastructure.  If we don't, it won't be long until Fairhaven is listed in the papers as a community seeking overrides to handle long ignore repairs, maintenance and replacements.

This would take a cooperative effort of leadership, administration and Town Meeting.

It would take the realization there is more to running a government than keeping the doors open.  

It would take dealing with the oft hammered theme of determining priorities and once determined being realistic in the level of services that can be provided within the financial means of the town.

Some departments, very few in fact, have been adjusting the budget approach to adopting at least some variation of the zero based budget, i.e. each year rather than starting the process from how much you received the prior year to starting the process from the ground up.  

A simplified explanation but it will do.  There seems to be this concept that just because that's the way it was, that is the way it needs to be. 

Couple that attitude with what I call the "Field of Dreams" syndrome and you essentially have a recipe that might be edible, but isn't for the dish you started out to make, is at best palatable, and certainly ends up with wasted ingredients.

The syndrome is by the way based on the line in the movie of the same name, "if you build it, he will come". If you do it, we will make money.  If you spend it we will become more efficient.  

I believe I have said in the past that every municipal employee should be required to work 6 months in the private sector after every five years of service as a reminder of just how "bad" they have it.  Every department head should be required to take a basic economics and business course.

The efficiency argument is always the most puzzling.  We will be more efficient.  Okay, how?  We will have more time. To do what? To better serve the public. Are you providing bad service now? Of course not, it just could be better.  

Well we all want better.  At what price.  The thing is usually the efficiency examples when looked at individually, however the snowball effect takes the small and very quickly starts adding zeros to the left of the decimal point. The real point is absent something not getting done, absent bad service, efficiency in times like this should be geared to saving money.  

The making money for the town is always a hoot too.  Seldom is it money for the "town".  It is in most instances a way to generate money to expand or create services and programs to be dedicated to expanded services and programs.  I have been waiting decades for some of those money makers to start producing.

This is where the economics and business classes need to come in.  

When you make money for the town it goes to the town for the town to use as it sees fit.  When you run any program of any nature that is not self supporting, you do not, I repeat do not make money for the town.  You cost the town money.  When you look at that cost, it has to be done so under the same exact principals as any other business. Use of existing staff may or may not be a cost.  However, if but for the new service you might not keep the same staffing levels, it is in fact a definite cost that needs to be factored.  Insurance, all kinds; building uses or needs; employee benefits (all kinds)

Now as to trash, well I said it yesterday. There is gold in them there garbage heaps.  Trash disposal is one of those things that are as big a priority as it gets.  Most of us don't give it a second thought, unless we forget to put it out by the curb, or it is still there at the end of the day.

Environmentally and financially, we have to become more creative and prudent with its disposal in the future.  We need to be realistic about it.  Quite frankly, for exactly the same reason many chaff at having to share the costs of high volume water users, many also chaff at the burden of trash disposal, especially for those who don't recycle (not that recycling is "free" either, however it does keep the cost of the trash disposal down).

I am all for a pay as you throw concept, assuming certain things are in place.  I can't as an individual and won't support a concept that simply takes a service out of the general fund to impose a burden on residents so the money can simply be shifted to other budgets.  There has to be a reasonable game plan associated with such a move, with at least some tangible additional benefit to residents over and above the "status quo" for everything else.

You have to show me that every budget to benefit from this move has in fact been looked at for true efficiency, true cost savings and needs have been prioritized based on realistic services being provided for a town this size.  

And here is the real trash talk for the day.  Before any department, board or committee is allowed to expand or create new services or operations, the same should be required to perform a true zero based budget for current operations.

Okay, enough for today. Because of the weather this morning there is a little bit of other stuff that needs to be shoved around, so I am going to put this one in the bag.  No charge by the way, yet that is.

Be safe.