David Garrick at the U-T announced this morning that the City of San Diego is knocking 10% off its proposed trash fee as a response to all the push back from residents. But is that enough to placate angry residents?
Garrick:
The revised proposal announced Wednesday suggests a monthly rate of $47.59 for full-service customers — more than $5 less than the initial proposal of $53 per month that the city announced in February.
The fee would still rise in coming years when the city adds new services like bulky trash pickup. But instead of rising to $65 in July 2027, the fee would rise to $59.42 at that time.
Customers willing to use smaller trash bins — 35 gallons, instead of the normal 95 gallons — would pay $36.72 per month instead of the previously proposed $42. That would rise to $45.66 in July 2027 instead of the previously planned $52.
This all comes after weeks and months of push back by residents and as the City Council is scheduled to debate on Monday, April 14. They have complained about a “bait and switch” deal by the City because at the time that voters went to the polls to vote in 2022 on the measure that ended decades of “free” trash pickup, the trash fee being touted was about half of the proposed fee the city eventually settled on.
Garrick continues:
City officials said this week that ending fully subsidized trash pickup at single-family homes will save the general fund between $80 million and $90 million a year, helping shrink a $258 million deficit estimated for the fiscal year that begins July 1. Even at the revised rates, San Diego would still have higher monthly trash fees than any city in Southern California except for Long Beach. But the differences would be smaller than under the earlier proposal.
San Diego’s rates would be higher than those in Riverside at $37.32, Los Angeles at $41.32 and Pasadena at $46.61. Long Beach now charges $42.66 but recently approved a rate hike to $50 in May and $68.73 in August 2026.
Most other cities in Southern California contract out trash service to private haulers like EDCO or Waste Management. The median monthly fee in 12 local cities surveyed by San Diego is $32, which includes monthly fees of $28 in El Cajon, $23 to $35 in Chula Vista, $28 to $31 in Carlsbad and $29 to $33 in Oceanside.
San Diego officials contend such comparisons can be misleading, stressing that trash collection is more complicated in San Diego because it’s a sprawling city that extends from San Ysidro near the U.S.-Mexico border all the way north to Rancho Bernardo.
For the balance of Garrick’s article, please go here.
We’ll have to see if this small amount is actually enough for residents to end their planned protest maneuvering.
No! Not good enough. I put my black bin out less than once/ every other month; same for green, and the blue bin once every 3 or 4 months.
Why should I be charged what the neighbor across the street pays for her seven (yes! seven!) bins every week???
Charge me $5/month and I’ll be quiet. Send in the protest form coming soon.
That is an admission this is a scam. No, turn up the heat!
SDSU does this. Ask for the moon and settle for less so everybody feels good. Hell, no.
As far as I am concerned, anyone complaining about the new trash rates is a wimpy whiner. You have had it too good for too long. Time to pay the piper!
Cry us a river fruitcake…
Take the money out of the mayor’s photo op fund. That should cover a decade of trash pickup for the america’s not-finest-city.
Well, Vern, Takes a fruitcake to know one I guess.
I would love to know how anyone is going to know what size trash can I put out on my curb. Some of my neighbors have both sizes. Some of my neighbors put their bins, large and small, on my curb. Who’s going to know who has what size? How in the heck could this ever work? If I turn in a large bin and get a small bin, but keep the other large bins I have and use those, just explain how it’ll work Dear City Council and Environmental Services peeps.
Oh, San Diego is more *complicated* and *sprawling* than LA?? Give me a break.
The city says they will require you to use their container, no more home depot units (which are far more durable than the brittle city bins).
The fee also includes new bins for everyone, which is very wasteful. Many bins are still serviceable. They should only provide a new bin when it is damaged.
The workers are rough on the bins, but residents also overload them. I can see people now opting for the smallest bin and overloading it.
Wow, well, my neighbor who bought 3 extra green and two extra black/blue cans each is going to be very angry. And he puts them out every week (blues, when he can).
My extra green and blue cans were no charge as long as you picked them up.
Is That Enough to Placate Residents?”
HELL NO!!!!
Bid it out …. get the city out of the garbage business
I attended the open house on Monday and came away with some notes.
IF this goes through, all black cans will be replaced with gray cans with RFID. The Blue cans will be replaced with a lighter blue also with RFID.
Green will remain the same. Fee will be per can. No free extra cans. All trucks will be replaced as well.
The City cannot contract out.
The City cannot make a profit on trash service. This is cost recovery only fee. We just don’t who will monitor.
Also of note: Miramar Land Fill will reach capacity in 2031. Even though the City owns the landfill, they still have to pay a “tipping” fee to dump. So when Miramar full they will need a different place which of course will be more expensive.
?Fees will only go up. Cost of living salaries, equipment, inflation blah blah blah.
Cost of service study will go to City Council April 14. City Council has the ability to adjust rates or any other part of the proposal.
After Council vote, notice will be sent to property owner on record determined by parcel number.
A request for decision on rates to be 6-9.
So, I don’t understand what accounts for this “reduction” in just a day….
Thanks, Korla. Wow. This whole plan is just awful. It seems pretty undoable, given the upfront investment cost. And the recent *adjustment* of fee rate by City Council … what??? Please, everyone, contact your councilmember now! I did.
We voted for the existing level of service and it seems that the Consultant and the City have done everything they can do to accomplish “mission creep” to add services and drive the price higher. Those of you that attended one of the on-line webinars by the consultant know exactly what I am talking about – e.g. the consultant asked if anyone was interested in bulk item pickup and suddenly the report said that residents want it.
One last thing – I calculated that the roughly 500,000 bins to be replaced, if laid down end to end, would stretch 330 miles – that’s more than the distance from San Diego to Las Vegas! Do we really need/want all new bins at this time?
Let’s just get back to the price we voted for and keep the current level of service!
It looks like the high prices were probably set up in advance to see how mad people would be paying twice what other SD County cities pay – should we expect that “Lower” rate of 50% rate above other cities in the County is OK, NO!. We need to keep our eye on the ball and push the city to lower costs and get competitive bids.
Remember SB10, which most everyone fought – that fight got SB10 off the list, but Gloria got in everything else that goes beyond state regulations like doubling transit priority distances to allow no parking spaces, bonus ADU programs, etc.
The city’s Measure B, which passed by fewer than 4,000 votes citywide on trash fees low balled the fees and stuck in a couple words “city forces” which they claim changed the City Charter on contracting trash services. Wrong to do in both cases.
How many Props and Measures does SD and SD County have to endure with improper language, bad facts, and campaigns that underhandedly get a Yes vote? Pensions, Qualcomm Stadium, bogus tax proposals from unreputable SANDAG then San Diego where the money would go into the General Fund while residents hope they use it for the infrastructure promised – didn’t work, Todd. Two votes on the 30 foot height limit because no environmental report was done. Then we had Ash St, Charger Seat guarantees, and a sweetheart proposal for a 30 year homeless compound near the airport. Really tough to deal with these politicians.
When dealing with monetary transparency** in San Diego, it’s always good to remember, “fool me once, shame on ME.” Fool me twice, shame on YOU!” Or as former President George Bush concluded, you can’t fool me again. “
**shenanigans
This price decrease is just round one of the price is right. When this goes before the City Council they are going to shave the price down to around $42 and try to ram this baby through.
People who still aren’t happy with the pricing should demand that the return post card for voting on this should be postage paid.
Good info, Paul and Bob. An important number to keep in our head is the YEARLY cost added to our property tax bill” $47 x 12 = $564 (!!). That is a lot of money added to tax bills for older homeowners who’ve had homes for 30 years or more. It may not be noticeable on huge tax bills of newer homeowners buying homes for >$1 mill, but it’s a lot for those who bought homes for <$100K decades ago.
Axios San Diego posted on this issue this morning. Included in their commentary is the following:
"What's new: The lowered price reflects two changes made by staff after a third round of outreach conducted after the original amount was announced and met with protests.
The fee will no longer cover regular community cleanup events, which staff says it plans to fund through other sources.
The city has $2 million unspent from residents who have purchased trash bins, which staff is pushing into the program to lower the initial cost.
By the numbers: The $47 fee would be for a typical bundle of large bins for trash, recycling and yard/food waste. That would gradually increase to $62 per month in 2029.
Staff proposed cheaper alternatives, like residents receiving fewer or no bulky item pickup options, that save little in the first year but could keep the cost to $57 in 2029."
Link: https://rb.gy/8eaney
The city could contract out all or part of the trash collection services if it took the appropriate legal steps.
It could also get the costs down by getting pension costs under control and reducing the number of senior management positions.
Look for the letter from the city
Choose “Valid Protest”
Send it in or drop it off.
for once, something is within our control.
And how’s that $4.5 million we paid to consultants working for us?
Right? Unbelievable. We criticized the city for hiring them, spending millions on something a few phone calls could have accomplished. But that’s one of the hallmarks of the Gloria administration: hire as many expensive consultants as possible to flood the zone with the “expertise” and try to chill the feedback from the citizenry.
No, a 10% reduction is not enough to placate me, or pretty much anyone else who studied this issue. I think a good number of those who voted for the trash fee would not have done so had they known the monthly fee would be $50, not the projected $29.
Proof that it was all arbitrary.
This is a joke. The city obviously knows what WE spend now (it’s our money, not theirs). And they should know how many households they serve. Which is far more than what’s been reported, since they’ve only counted single family homes. There are many duplex/triplex/4plex units which will be subject to these fees.
The number of homes serviced is close to double what they estimated. This means they’ve either underestimated their new cost of operations, or they’ve overestimated their fees needed to fund it.
They should ask for their money back from this idiot consultant they hired. Or perhaps that consultant is the only smart one here, walking away with a fat contract.
Doubt if the ADU’s have been accounted for. That would only decrease the fee.
On February 26, I put in a Public Records Request for the following:
1. The number of households that were serviced by the city trash pick up program in 2023.
2. The total budget trash pick up in 2023 cost the city.
One would think this information was at the city’s fingertips considering that they are working on the new trash fee right now. PRRs are supposed to be answered within 10 days. If the request is complicated, the city can legally take another 14 days. I just got an email stating they might have an answer by April 25, or 53 days after the request was made. Way beyond what the Public Records Act requires.
This looks like a stall before the city council vote because with the total budget and the number of households, the current cost per household is easily calculated and maybe the city does not want anyone to see that.
Thanks for doing the PRR, Geoff. Very interested to see the numbers.
He’s looking to reduce the budget deficit and the inflated cost for the city trash pick up will fill that void nicely. Once all that money comes rolling in Gloria will be on every newscast, in every newspaper and neighborhood newsletter. He’s resume building.