TIME HAS COME TO WORK TOGETHER ON TRASH ISSUE

Cape Girardeau residents are enduring firsthand through changes in the city's solid waste program the effects of increased state and federal mandates imposed on local governments.

Many citizens have voiced frustration over a cut in trash service, from two collections per week to a single pickup in lieu of a weekly curbside recycling collection, despite a $1.64 hike in monthly trash fees. They've directed, perhaps unfairly, their complaints at the city administration.

When the city last fall embarked on an ambitious recycling plan, city officials' aim was to accommodate new state solid waste regulations that restrict the materials allowed in Missouri's landfills and require a 40 percent reduction by 1998 the overall waste going into landfills.

Recycling is one of the few ways to successfully reduce materials in the solid waste stream. But recycling is expensive and the state failed to offer funding to help cities and counties comply with the mandates.

Rather than deal with the new solid waste law irrationally and either jump blindly into recycling or ignore the state law altogether, the city administration attempted to discover what's worked and what hasn't in other cities. A pilot recycling program was tested in two Cape Girardeau subdivisions after a citizens committee spent months researching the plan. The current curbside recycling program is the product of the pilot program.

Officials knew the program wouldn't be cheap, so they've tried to offset the expense through belt-tightening.

By taking steps over the past two years to operate the solid waste division as a "business" separate from other city operations, city of~ficials reduced general operating costs from $600,000 to $451,000.

If calculated as a portion of customers' monthly trash bill, trash collection costs have been cut $2, from $6 to $4. Much of that reduction is attributable to the reduction in trash collections. But other significant cuts also have been made. There are five fewer full-time equivalent employees in the solid waste division today than there were six years ago. So why have trash fees increased?

State and federal regulations and public opposition make it extremely difficult to site a new landfill, and Cape Girardeau's is nearly full. So, while monthly, per-customer costs associated with operation of the landfill have been cut from $1.12 in 1989 to 57 cents, monthly transfer station, hauling and disposal costs have increased from $1.44 per customer to nearly $3.

The city has little control over disposal and hauling costs, particularly since the increases merely reflect the added expense of proliferating landfill regulations.

The city's recycling program adds another $1.87 to customers' monthly bill, and leaf collection service also mandated by Missouri's solid waste law adds an additional 79 cents per month. Another 41 cents were added to reflect the amount of money the city formerly drew from the general fund to subsidize solid waste.

By moving interest expense on debt to the general fund over to the solid waste division, the city is attempting to make solid waste a "separate, stand-alone" operation not dependent on general tax revenues.

In other words, city officials have made a good-faith effort to ensure the residential trash fee accurately represents the costs of solid waste operations. The city could probably continue to subsidize trash operations and refuse to raise fees, which would be the politically safe way to handle the issue. But every $1 from the general fund that is earmarked for solid waste is $1 that's not going toward better streets, sewers, parks, police and fire protection and city employee salaries.

Granted some cities are able to provide excellent trash service at a cost below Cape Girardeau's and recycle to boot. But those cities also heavily subsidize solid waste operations from the general fund. It's a matter of priorities as to what city services you want to provide through general tax revenues. Either way, the public foots the bill.

Of course, we don't expect the public to welcome fee increases particularly in light of a reduction in trash service. But it's likely the public's anger is misdirected. If paying locally for increased state and federal mandates aimed at protecting the environment is annoying, take it up with your state and federal elected officials. On the local level, it's time to work together to try to come up with new, creative ways to meet the mandates with efficient, fair and effective programs.