Back to index of open letters by Donald Sauter.

Summary: The Prince George's County solid waste service charge is wildly excessive and blatantly unfair. Show your disapproval - BOYCOTT RECYCLING.

Table of Contents for this Web page. (All links are internal - just start reading instead of clicking!)

• Open letter to PG County homeowners.
• Letter to the Washington Times.
• Letter to Wayne Curry, County Executive.
• Letter to the Department of Justice.
• Follow-up correspondence with Councilwoman Audrey Scott.
• TRIM (the PG County tax "freeze") and our schools.

Have you ever taken a close look at your property tax bill? Trash pick-up which used to cost less than $200 per year from a private contractor now costs you $319.44 per year from your friendly county government. Guess they needed some extra loot...

This charge is tacked onto your property tax bill. I suppose they figured that, a) most people hardly look at their property tax bill since the mortgage company takes care of it, and b) the trash charge might be hidden somewhat amongst the even bigger line items.

This solid waste service charge is the same for everybody, regardless of the value of your property, your financial situation, or - what it should be based on - the amount of trash you produce.

Something is very rotten here. We've gone to a lot of trouble separating out our supposedly valuable recyclables. We give them up for free to the government, which should be making money off of them. This effort also reduces the volume of trash significantly. One would reasonably expect to see a major decrease in the cost of his trash pickup.

Nope. The government comes along and slams us with a whopping price increase. No exceptions - even for the single, low-level consumer who may produce only about 5 bags of non-recyclable trash per year (my situation.) That's $63.89 per bag!!!

Some comparisons are interesting:

My yearly phone bill is about $200.
My yearly electric bill is about $280.
My yearly water bill is about $70 (most of which is a new "account maintenance fee" - don't get me started.)
My yearly gasoline expenditure is about $280.

...AND THE REMOVAL OF 5 BAGS OF TRASH IS $319.44???

If you also feel that this solid waste service charge is a blatant abuse of government power, I propose that you protest by ceasing all recycling efforts. (I also swore I would stop picking up trash around the neighborhood, but I've caved in now and then.)

Pass the word on to your neighbors. Poetry's not my strong suit but I've even whipped up a slogan:

"Don't be a chump - send it right to the dump!"

I say that, for the extra hundred-plus bucks a year per household, the county council members can snort through our garbage themselves.
(Back to the top of this page).

Title: Times "sleepwalked" story on trash pickup in PG.
Published 11Dec96

Ok, I give up. How does the "tragedy" of some Montgomery County residents having their trash bills reduced (!!!) from $8 to $4.50 a month rate almost a quarter-page story ("Cutback in Montgomery trash pickup [to once a week] raises small stink", 30Nov96) when you still haven't devoted a single sentence to the outrage perpetrated by the Prince George's County government?

Last year, out of the blue, PG took over trash pickup and implemented a $319.44 per year "solid waste service charge". That's $26.62 per month. That's over a hundred dollars more than the cost of the previous private service.

For someone like me, who lives alone and produces about 5 bags of trash a year, that's $63.89 per bag. And no, they don't send a butler into my kitchen to retrieve it.

Although you sleep-walked through that story, I'm here to report that there is the potential for some good to come out of it. Even the person who introduced the bill, County Councilwoman Audrey Scott, admits (Bowie Blade-News, Nov 7 1996) that it may have prompted voters to approve Question I which says the electorate gets to vote on all increases in taxes and fees in the county.

Of course they'll figure out some way around that, but at least they'll have to squirm a while.
(Back to the top of this page).

To: Wayne Curry. 14741 Governor Oden Bowie Drive; Upper Marlboro, MD 20772. 30Apr96
Response: None to this letter. In order to get a letter of explanation from the county, I had to write about the problem to the governor, my U.S. senators and congressman.

You wrote to me trying to explain the reason for the county taking over trash pickup. To be honest, I couldn't understand much of what you were saying.

["The primary source of fund revenues is the tipping fee, which is charged to anyone bringig waste to either of the County's two landfills. Declining revenues in the County's solid waste fund are directly related to declines in the amount of waste being delivered to County facilities for disposal. The problem has been further aggravated by the Supreme Court's Carbone decision, which means that we can no longer rely on flow control to ensure that our landfills receive adequate waste. Loss of legal flow control means that Prince George's County must now rely on economic measures to ensure that the system generates sufficient revenues to pay its expenses. The problem of lost tonnage is not unique to Prince George's County, however. It is a nationwide problem caused by a changing economy in the trash industry."]

I think what I read was something like, "because the revenues generated by our landfills have been declining and we can't force people to use our landfills, we have to charge more."

But why would more money be needed to finance an operation that is falling into disuse? Makes no sense to me.

More to the point, you and everyone else I have contacted did not address my concern. I will give you another chance. Please fill out the questionnaire below and return it to me at your convenience.

1. Does $319 sound like a reasonable fee to pay to have about 5 or 6 bags of trash removed in a year?

     a.  Yes.
     b.  No.  
     c.  Other: _________________________________________________
         ________________________________________________________

2. Is it reasonable to charge a person who only produces about 5 or 6 bags of trash a year the same amount as another household that produces that much or more per week?

     a.  Yes.
     b.  No.  
     c.  Other: _________________________________________________
         ________________________________________________________

3. Are you aware that there are jurisdictions around the country - and in this area, even - that have trash collection systems that charge residents based on usage? (For example, in Chevy Chase, residents are charged from $25 to $75 per year, depending on the number and size of their containers.)

     a.  Yes.
     b.  No.  
     c.  Other: _________________________________________________
         ________________________________________________________

(Back to the top of this page).

To: Antitrust Division/Dept. of Justice. 10th and Constitution Av NW; Washington DC. 30Apr96.
Response: A follow-up telephone call was received. They indicated they would look into it. That was all.

I recently read about your lawsuit against Stilwell, Okla.

[News item from late April, 1996: "Justice sets precedent in suing municipality." The Justice Department charged in an unprecedented lawsuit yesterday that an Oklahoma city illegally denied residents and businesses access to its water and sewer service unless they agreed to buy electricity from the city. This was the first monopoly abuse case ever brought by the department's antitrust division against a municipality...]

I thought it couldn't hurt to ask if what Prince George's County is doing to its residents is legal. Starting this year PG County took over trash pickup and raised our collection fees by more than 50% over what the private trash pickup company charged. Can they do that???

For someone like me it is blatantly unfair. Anyone would agree that $319 is an awful lot of money to pay to have 5 or 6 bags of trash picked up a year. I am offered no alternatives - zero.

Thanks for looking into this.

(Back to the top of this page).

Finally, after 5 years, in the summer of 2000, we got a partial admission of what the solid waste charge was implemented for. Councilwoman Audrey Scott wrote in her Summer 2000 newsletter:

After waiting nearly five years for the Administration to propose a reduction in the solid waste fee for residential users, I introduced legislation to accomplish that goal.

When I was elected in 1994 the Council was faced with a $128 million deficit. To offset teh deficit the Council adopted legislation for a solid waste system benefit charge for residential users. Residential property owners were charged $50 which was to be reduced once a fee schedule was implemented for commercial property owners...

I am pleased to report that my legislation reducing the residential system benefit charge from $50 to $30 was unanimously adopted by the Council...

My response to that was put in a letter to Councilwoman Scott:

Aug 17 2000

Dear Councilwoman Scott,

I read about the disposal fee issue first in the Lanham Gazette (Jul 27 2000), and then in your newsletter, and I'm completely baffled. Where does this piddling $50 you talk about come from? The solid waste service charge on my property tax bill says $319.44 - as it does on everyone else's. Now if you could get that down to $20, it would bring it more or less into line with the few minutes of labor per year that goes into processing my trash.

I'm also quite baffled - if not downright angry - with the casual admission in your newsletter that the solid waste charge was implemented in 1994 to wipe out a $128 million deficit. I challenge you, or anyone, to produce any statement from the county government at that time to the people saying anything like, "Hey, we need the money; we can do this."

The explanation for the solid waste charge was always buried in gobbledy-gook. Please visit my web page on the subject, "PG County overcharges for trash pickup!" Your name is in there [see the letter to the Washington Times]... I would really be pleased if you would address my concerns in a letter to the Gazette newspapers.

She didn't do that, but did take the time to write me personally. Her main point was that the $50 in question is just the "Base Benefit Charge" (whatever that means) portion of the total $319.44 Solid Waste Charge.

She went on to say:

You are correct that I stated in my Summer 2000 Newsletter that this $50 was implemented to help offset a deficit which newly elected officials faced when they took office. However, I hope you understand that this fee is, basically, a landfill use fee, which, until legislation was introduced, County residents who had trash pick up had not paid. Previously, only private haulers were charged for use of the landfill, based upon the weight of their trash.

Sorry, I don't understand gobbledygook. Which is it - a landfill use fee, or easy money to offset a deficit? Of course, "private haulers were charged for the use of the landfill" - they're the ones who dumped. They paid with some of the money they charged their customers - which was far less than what you're charging us - and kept the rest for themselves, which is what doing business is all about.

(Back to the top of this page).

In a January 7, 1999 editorial, the Gazette newspaper made its case for repealing TRIM, "the 20-year-old property tax cap that put Prince George's County residents on the forefront of a then-nascent nationwide grass-roots tax revolt."

The argument is that "...TRIM is an albatross around the county's neck that keeps it from effectively tackling the problem of overcrowded, underfunded public schools."

The Gazette asked for readers' thoughts, pro and con, on the subject. Here is my letter, which they graciously printed in the January 14, 1999 issue.

What tax freeze?

Here are a few thoughts in response to your editorial, "Is it time to trim TRIM?"

I moved to Prince George's County at the beginning of 1982. My "total property taxes" for the first full year were $785.32. In spite of the so- called "tax freeze" I kept hearing about, my property taxes rose steadily year by year. I still live in the exact same small house and the "total consolidated tax bill" for 1998 was $1888.10. Some freeze... I hate to think what our county leaders would help themselves to if the "freeze" were lifted.

I'm not an expert on the problems in our schools. I'm not an expert on education. But I doubt that throwing money at the perceived problems is the answer. I am certain that there is no hope for getting maximum achievement from the students in the current heterogeneous classroom mixtures.

Teaching to the slower students holds the quicker students back; teaching to the quicker students leaves the slower students in the dust. The students must be grouped according to ability - and that wouldn't cost a penny.

At the time I wrote the above letter, I was volunteering regularly at a local elementary school. I enjoyed the work tremendously and had even recommended such volunteer work at the end of the above letter to anyone concerned about our schools. I now see that as quite naive. I mean, what could a school do with a crush of parents showing up every day hollering, "We're here to help!"

For the last couple of years (writing in Sep 2001) I've actually worked in schools and it's become clear to me that, in addition to the above-noted problem of heterogeneous classroom mixtures, the biggest problem is really discipline. Crazy as it sounds, adults in our schools have been stripped of all power. Kids know they don't have to do anything, and the teachers can't do anything about it except splutter. This, of course, could change tomorrow if we wanted it. (Stay tuned for a web page devoted to my thoughts on education.)

CLICK HERE to send me an email; view my guestbook; or sign my guestbook.
Back to my main page.
Back to the top of this page.

Parents, if you're considering tutoring or supplemental education for your child, you may be interested in my observations on Kumon.