A taxpayers’ effort to overturn San Diego’s trash fee has — at least for now — survived a legal challenge, the case appears headed for trial or a settlement that could significantly reduce the controversial monthly fee.
In a tentative ruling issued Wednesday, April 8, Judge Euketa Oliver rejected the City’s argument that the evidence overwhelmingly shows that it is not charging taxpayers more than the actually cost of the trash collection. The judge ruled that the taxpayers’ attorneys “have presented evidence raising substantial questions about the reliability of the City’s underlying assumptions, particularly with respect to the relationship between service demand and projected costs.”
Noting that the city had overestimated the number of households subject to the new trash fee, the judge noted that “despite this decline in demand and correlating reduction in waste tonnage, the City’s projection show increasing — not decreasing — costs… The City’s position — that fewer customers can nonetheless result in higher overall costs and higher per-household fees — may be theoretically possible, but it requires a clear and well-supported explanation, (and) that explanation is lacking.”
On that issue and four other claims raised by the plaintiff taxpayers, the judge said the conflicting evidence should best be analyzed and decided on by a jury.
At a hearing Thursday morning, the City’s attorneys urged the judge to reconsider her tentative ruling. They said the city in fact hasn’t significantly reduced the number of homes that get trash service, and that the cost of trash collection will definitely exceed revenue’s generated by the fees.
But the judge affirmed her tentative ruling, and scheduled a May 8 trial date with an April 24 trial conference to confirm that both sides are ready for a trial.
Very few people really need weekly recycling pickups, and the lid-tippers (who inspect only the top layer of trash) serve almost no useful purpose; labor expenses that played at least some part in inflating the fee.
The Lincoln Club ballot initiative to repeal the fee is imperfect, as it sunsets after only two years. But if it qualifies it’s almost sure to pass. The council could have rolled back the fee to the Measure B estimates and probably avoided both the Aguirre suit and the initiative(s), but now it’s too late. They’ll wind up with nothing instead of half.
If only the city had been honest, this would have not happened, but then again maybe that is just too much to ask from elected officials. Now their credibility is out the window.
My pitchfork is sharpened and my tiki torch is filled.
Hopefully both sides can agree on a fair price
for the trash fee. San Diego does a great job at
keeping our alleys clean. The best solution is
go back to the table and come to fair agreement
On a monthly price.
Patrick Walsh
Measure B was a fraud. So glad the judge did not give City knee-jerk deference to their position. We the people — not our so-called representatives — are the ones needed to keep this City from its continuing and more and more blatant corrupt tactics to fleece its citizens. How many people read the Cost of Study? You’d be shocked at what the parcel owners are paying for – several are unconstitutional as they are not parcel-related services. The whole truth needs to be revealed in a trial — let the jury decide.
I believe Mike Aguirre intimated in his UT interview he would drop the suit if the city went back to the $23-$29 monthly estimate originally proposed. Privatize this thing.
Mike Aguirre also stated he would discuss a settlement offer with Kevin Faulconer and the Lincoln Club to stop his proposed ballot measure which only gets rid of the trash fees for 2 years. Then after 2 years of no trash fees, Kevin Faulconer’s ballot measure goes back to the existing plan of even higher trash fee rate increases than now. Which is not a long term solution.