Tag Cloud
Friday, February 10, 2012
PART II - Sacramento City “Green” Waste Proposal Selectively Punishes Central City Residents
by Dale Kooyman, published on December 4, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Storyline: city issues
Community Tags
politics
Part I described differences in our city’s neighborhoods and how the self- appointed green waste committee ignored those differences, requesting council to punish some central city (CC) by forcing them to containerize city tree-dropped leaves 10 months out of the year. This second and final part details more differences:
Another pesky difference for part of the central city. Did any of you readers ever get one of those $49 dollar tickets for parking on a street where the sign reads, “No parking 8 to 12 on Mon, Tues, Wed, Thurs - street cleaning”? If you have, just park south of R Street in Newtown, Booth, Richmond Grove or anywhere in South Side. Motorists—commuter or resident—-there don’t get parking tickets because those streets don’t have signs that restrict parking for street cleaning. They may have time zoned parking but not street cleaning illegal parking penalties.
The street sweeper just charges merrily down the center of those streets past the cars parked along the curb. There is little or nothing to sweep because the traffic does a credible job of blowing litter and leaves under the parked cars—just like J Street. But the city can justify its street sweeping charges to the property owners in those neighborhoods, so that “service” goes on.
If you happen to have the influence, you can get the street cleaning signs removed even in a district where everyone else has them. A neighbor who lives on I Street told me that UC Extension succeeded in getting the city to remove street cleaning signs for one block there because students got too many tickets. Perhaps they couldn’t read or didn't understand the signs because I often walk by there in the mornings and see plenty of spaces to park on 18th, both sides of the street, and north and south of the intersection.
Further, on garbage and recycling days residents on that block can’t place cans on the curb for pickup. They must roll them around the parked cars to place them in the unmarked or marked bike lanes—you know those lanes that bikers complain about the danger from leaves blocking their rides (except for very few cases, leaves do not block bike lanes in parking restricted areas)? Further, that block is far dirtier now because there is no street cleaning. Odd that I have not seen complaints about cans standing in bike lanes on streets where those conditions exist. If parking restrictions are removed, cans will stand in marked or unmarked bike lanes throughout the central city on Monday through Thursday! Maybe that’s okay because bikers can see cans better so they can swerve around faster than leaf piles. That is the way it used to be all over the central city before the claw.
Now if the street cleaning with the claw goes away, then street cleaning parking restrictions are no longer necessary either. So shouldn’t the street cleaning signs go too? Also gone would be the parking revenue from tickets due to motorists’ illegal parking during those restricted times. These are all logical steps that should follow for posting and parking restrictions to be fair and consistent.
Au contraire says staff! You see, the city likes those restricted parking signs north of R Street because their truck drivers can “pick up the bins easier.” So they want to penalize residents north of R Street more by asking council to change the signs from “no parking from __to __ street cleaning” to “no parking from __to __ garbage, recycling, green waste pickup.”
Really? Then what about south of R Street, i.e. Newton Booth, Poverty ridge, Richmond Grove and South Side? Those neighborhoods don’t have restricted parking now to enable drivers to more easily pick up garbage and recycling cans. So why would the city not post restricted parking signs in one neighborhood on certain days for garbage/recycling pickup BUT post them in another? Seems like penalization to me. Also sounds like a double standard too, if not discrimination, based on where a person owns property. Is that legal?
Another whole can of worms is the lack of clarity whether small business and residential property owners are subsidizing large property owners. The public and council need clarification of fees for various kinds and sizes of property owners. There appear to be inequities in collecting tree waste, garbage and recycling fees, which may be contributing to Solid Waste’s shortage of income. There also seems to be considerable confusion and inequities about business vs. residential fees and related options.
The same may exist between single-family home, duplex, triplex, four-plex property owners and larger apartment house owners. Options appear to be more limited for small property owners than large owners.
Questions:
1. Does council or even public work’s staff have specific and clear knowledge of the fee structure?
2. What guidelines or outline does the Revenue Division follow? When was it last updated?
3. From whom and how do they get updated information?
4. Is the use terminology consistent between and within the different departments? For example, PW staff at NAG used the term "commercial" for describing collection services for large apartment complexes. Those properties are not zoned commercial.
5. What about houses that have the same yards as lived-in homes but are businesses? Are their fees the same?
6. Why can one walk down a stretch of tree-canopied streets but one side of the block has restricted paring signs for street cleaning and the other side does not? Are those signs placed strategically for revenue purposes from residents but avoid placing in front of businesses?
7. What steps and guidelines does the city plan to take to resolve inequities and not penalize the elderly, disabled and those with health conditions that could be exacerbated by handling litter, debris and leaf allergies.
8. Does the city know how many of the 85,000 who “volunteered” to containerize their waste to take advantage of the reduced pickup rate still place their waste in the gutters because some weeks they have too much to place all of it in a bin?
A friend who lives in the south area and whose neighbors volunteered to containerize tells me that when those same neighbors have more than what their bid will hold, THEY PUT THEIR REFUSE INTO THE STREET!
Whatever future action is proposed and taken, it is clear that there are many unanswered questions, unanticipated inequities and serious health and safety consequences. These must be considered and resolved before moving forward.
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
I talked to the claw crew today (as they cleared probably 20 bins worth of leaves from in front of my house) and they said that they initially tried to keep track of who was paying for what but it quickly became too much of a hassle. The crewman said, "It's criminal what the Council is trying to do to people in your neighborhood with mandatory bin pick-up."
I believe that part of the problem is that no one on the Council actually takes care of their own yard as I do. When, as a Councilperson, you've got a garden service every week, it's easy to have misconceptions about how our city's biomass is actually managed. Thanks for your efforts to educate.
It is a complicated decision with far reaching effects and staff should have analyzed the proposal more thoroughly so they can explain it more accurately to the council rather than over simplifying it.
i'm sure you're right too, that council hires gardeners so have no idea as to how other folks cope with the situation even now let alone under the proposal.
The city policy wonks definitely don't want to treat one neighborhood differently than another. That appears to be the mindset and partial basis of those who want city-wide containerization.
Simple Solutions invoking the mentality of Maintaining a uniform policy that all residents are subject to:
1)If restricted parking facilitates easier bin pick-up Then Enforce Parking Restrictions City-Wide
Pros-that 49.00 ticket of which the city gets 40 and the state 9 will undoubtedly have some positive impact on the current city's budget
Con-Those residents who do not experience enforcement now will not be happy.
Let's try a Pilot Restricted Parking Enforcement program on those 85,000 households that are so happy with the bins-that should give those council members and the mayor a few happy phone calls and emails
OR
2)Since only a small percentage of neighborhoods have restricted street sweeping parking enforcement that now only occurs once every two months. Remove All Street Sweeping Parking Enforcement!
Pros-The neighbors would love it...especially on the holidays like Thanksgiving, Christmas, News Years, 4th of July and Labor Day! The council members and mayor will probably receive some positive calls and emails.
Cons-The Bin collection in these few neighborhoods will now proceed at the same rate as the rest of the city, the trash collectors will not get those routes done as quickly. The loss of that ticket revenue will have a negative impact on the city's budget.
Pilot Program Suggestion 2-Try it!
There you go-two scenarios worthy of a follow-up Pilot Program, prior to any vote proposal going to council.
Which one do you think All the City Residents will support?
Food For Thought-next time your traveling West of I st past 21st or East on Q st starting at 5th...make note of the haphazard placement of these enforcement signs for street sweeping enforcement....there not uniformly distributed on both sides of the street or continuously....What's Up With That? It's street sweeping-Both sides of the street require it and all that trash, leaves and debris piles up equally on both sides of the street!
How long does it take a single parking space to generate $40.00 to the general fund?
In a few neighborhoods, it depends upon what time and day it is.
Is Parking Enforcement for trash collection Coming to Your neighborhood Next?
http://www.southsidepark.org/claw
The very first time I came to Sacramento, I was riding my bike from the train station to my friends house, riding through your very neighborhood, and I was taken out by a pile of yard waste that was in the bike lane on a street that DOES have street cleaning, yet that resident (and the majority of all the residents along the way) still put their yard waste in the bike lane.
That one incident took out three spokes on my front wheel, tore off my front fender, ripped open my pannier, tore open my jacket and split the bar tape on my handlebars; well over $100 in damage (parts alone) to just my bike, my jacket cost me $280.
Where there are no marked bike lanes, I create piles at least two to three feet from the curb which is well within the parking lane--not the unmarked bike lane. I must allow that distance from the curb because drivers often careen their vehicles in toward the curb skidding into the leaf pile and mashing the mass against the curb which then either clogs the drains or causes rain or sprinkler water to stand in the gutter.
Your one time experience flies in the face of my bike neighbors who say they rarely encounter piles of leaves in the marked bike lanes in midtown but do so on the narrow streets and rolled curb gutters in surrounding neighborhoods. They also say that they have had to dodge garbage and recycling cans parked in those lanes. You omit this fact. You make this broad generalized accusation that many people place the leaves out on the street you were riding, BUT you don't identify which street OR the block numbers.
As to the spokes in your wheel, those were not taken out by leaves! Leaves alone do not do that damage. Those were any number of boards, slats or other litter, sticks, twigs, broken up branches, much of the latter which will not fit into the bins. But as a 33 year old renter you would not have to face that problem as well as the physical challenges for seniors, disabled and elderly that I mentioned in the article. Remember, you may get there one day. As I said, please be considerate of others.
Incidentally, where were you when residents had to fight the city to get marked lanes installed as fithgensacramento states? Did you as a biker, help those homeowners who were being considerate of you?
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/2343463.html
The one with the "claw" picking up the pile of lawn clippings...out in the street....beyond two parked cars....in a neighborhood with no parking restrictions? So are you OK with installing parking restrictions in all neighborhoods, so as to not have the green waste pile replaced with a "dangerous" bin out in the street and additionally facilitate faster pick-up of all containers-Or are you of the opinion that since the neighbors, who fought to get those bike lanes installed, for a multitude of reasons besides alternative mode commuting, including slowing traffic down and making auto and ped crossing of those streets safer in those residential neighborhoods-should also be the select few that are penalized with parking restrictions- to simply keep those bins out of the bike lanes on trash day for another select group of commuters?
Now remember -You have two, one-way bike lanes on-one way streets-if your using them correctly and not going the wrong way-trash collection only occurs on one side of the street.
OneMoreThing-As you have previously stated in another article, you rent, and based on your profile-live in or around Boulevard Park. So what attracted you to live there? Quiet, historic residential neighborhood adjacent to the job center of the downtown. You should have been here when it wasn't that, "rolled up" those do-it-yourself-er" sleeves and been part of the solution that created the renaissance of midtown-before the johnny-come-lately's- arrived. who now take credit for creating everything but the internet. Perhaps you'd have a better appreciation of the "ownership" that residents feel in creating those solutions and take great offense to proposed changes that do not include their input.
Beyond that, as a life long bicycle commuter, I (and ever bicycle commuter I have spoken with) would much prefer having a container in the bike lane as opposed to a leaf pile because a container is actually visible from a way off as opposed to a pile of yard waste which you can't see until you're up on it (I'm speaking of night riding here, and yes I do use a bike light). Furthermore, currently residents put their piles of yard waste out on whatever day they do their yard work and there that pile sits until the claw comes through; but with containers, they would not be put out until they are actually going to get picked up. So instead of never knowing if/when there is going to be a pile of yard waste in my path, we'd go to knowing exactly when/where there's going to be a container in my path.
Tenants living on one corner apt. had raked the walks and park strip and dumped the small pile between two cars with part of the pile overlapping into the bike lane. I also saw large leaf piles that homeowner neighbors had raked up in front of their properties and dumped into the parking lanes. HOWEVER, I saw cars pulling away from the curb over the piles, and with their bumpers, effectively redistributed the pile into the marked bike lanes.
One car's undercarriage had hooked onto something and was dragging it with him as he drove away, no doubt later depositing it in the street later on when it finally came loose.
But as bikers whizz by, they wouldn't see those details as you probably didn't notice either. So in the future, don't assume that the gardeners or homeowners place leaves in the bike lanes but remember that cars may have moved part of a larger pile there.
But, like you, I also was out on a walk the other (though on Monday evening) and on my walk down G Street between 16th and Alhambra, there was not one single block that did not have a freshly deposited pile of yard waste blocking the bike lane (at one intersection, there was a pile that spanned from the curb, across the bike lane and into the lane of vehicular traffic; that pile was also blocking the crosswalk AND the handicap ramp and was taking up close to three parking spaces). Really, on my walk, there was never any less that two piles per block, per side of the street, that were blocking the bike lanes in violation of the CVC.
So yes, I do notice details as I "whizz by".
During the two months of the year when most of the leaves fall, there will still be claw services so the homeowners getting the rate break for putting waste in their bins will also be getting the excess picked up by the claw--just as they were before they volunteered to containerize. Please refer to the comment from an East Sac resident and my relating the experience of a friend in the south area whose "volunteer" neighbors who also take advantage of both services.
The irony in this battle is that it's ILLEGAL to block a bike lane; I've contacted SPD regarding this and they can't/wont do anything about the waste piles/bins in the bike lane because they didn't see who actually put them in the bike lane. So what we have is a City service requiring citizens to break the law because they know that the odds of the police seeing them doing it are astronomical.
So yes, Dale ... you've proved my point while promoting the breaking of a State law.
Eat that green-freak eco-warriors!