Unexpectedly high proposed trash fees in ‍San Diego are⁢ fueling a debate over whether teh city could legally outsource trash services to private carriers, ⁤potentially offering residents lower⁣ rates.

According to the city charter, the mayor has the authority to consider outsourcing any service except law ⁢enforcement, fire, or‌ lifeguard services. However, the city’s 2022 ballot measure that ⁣initiated the new trash fees may conflict with this provision.

An analysis of 12 local cities that outsource trash services reveals that they‍ generally have lower monthly bills,⁤ sometimes considerably so.

San Diego⁣ officials are proposing a full-service monthly fee of $53, which is projected to increase to $65 by ⁤July 2027 with the addition of​ more trash ⁤and recycling services.

The median monthly fee in the 12 local cities surveyed is $32, including monthly fees of $28 in El Cajon, $23⁣ to $35 in ‍Chula Vista, $28 to $31 in Carlsbad, and $29 to $33 in​ Oceanside.

However, San Diego ⁢officials argue that such comparisons can be misleading, ​emphasizing that trash collection is more complex in San Diego due to its expansive⁢ geography, stretching from San Ysidro near the U.S.-Mexico border ​to Rancho Bernardo in the north.

It is not reasonable to compare our costs to those of small and compact cities, saeid Nicole ⁣Darling, a city spokesperson.

This debate arises as San Diego prepares to begin​ charging residents in single-family homes for trash and ​recycling services,⁢ ending decades of not directly billing for ‌thes⁤ services.

A 2022 city ballot measure,narrowly approved by voters,allows the city to start charging for these services. Officials claim this will save the city approximately $82⁢ million annually, the ‍amount previously spent on trash collection.

Prior to the 2022 vote,the city’s independent budget⁣ analyst estimated monthly bills woudl range from $23 to ‌$29 if the​ measure passed.

However, ​following a thorough analysis that recommended⁤ significant improvements to trash and recycling services, the city is now proposing ​fees roughly double that amount, sparking public⁤ outcry.

Darling emphasized the need for context when comparing the city’s proposed rates to those charged by private carriers in smaller county cities.

When comparing rates between jurisdictions, it is important to consider geographic‍ factors ⁢such as city​ size, distribution, and proximity to facilities; community needs and preferences; the scope of ⁤services; variability in operating costs; and whether the fees charged fully recover the costs of expenses, Darling said.

She⁤ also noted that San ​Diego experimented with outsourcing trash collection in the early 1990s, with‌ disappointing results.

During a two-year trial where‍ single-family home customers were divided roughly equally between city crews and Waste ‌Management teams,city crews missed significantly fewer pickups and ‌were more effective⁣ at delivering replacement containers.

Afterward, an independent consultant concluded that if the deficiencies that Waste‍ Management exhibited ​were remedied through contractual requirements, the​ cost of⁤ service would ⁢increase by at least ​10 percent, thereby eliminating any cost savings ⁤from the privately operated‌ service.

Before city⁢ leaders‍ and residents can assess whether outsourcing would be a prudent move,officials must address the question of whether San Diego even has the discretion to consider it.

section 117 of the city charter states that the mayor and City Council can outsource any city service, except public safety, if city services can be provided more economically and efficiently by an independent contractor than by persons employed⁤ in the classified Service, while maintaining the quality of service and protecting the public interest.

This language​ was added to the charter when city voters ⁤approved Proposition C in November⁣ 2006.

Tho, the ⁢2022 ballot measure that ‌allowed the city to ⁤begin charging for trash collection services (Measure B) states that city forces will collect and transport residential solid waste for transfer,⁤ transport, ⁤recycling, or disposal.

The use of the words city forces was⁣ not accidental, according to a prominent advocate for the measure.

When the‍ San Diego County Taxpayers Association complained in ⁢2022 that Measure B would preclude outsourcing by locking in city⁢ crews as the exclusive trash ⁣haulers for single-family⁢ homes, Councilmember Joe⁤ LaCava defended the measure.

LaCava highlighted that state law requires‌ the city to charge no more than the cost of providing trash collection service, while private carriers have the power to ‍charge more, ‍as allowed by the market.

Competition doesn’t always play out the way people think, lacava said in 2022.

lacava also said it would be disruptive to replace ‌city crews with private carriers, noting that San Diego had recently purchased dozens of trash trucks⁤ and ​hired many new drivers​ to comply with the state’s new organic waste recycling law.

I am confident that they are providing⁤ the best service and the‍ best ⁣price going forward, and that is why I‍ think ⁢competition is⁢ not the right answer for ⁤good governance, LaCava ⁤said.

When⁣ asked if there is a ⁢conflict between the charter and Measure B, City Attorney​ Heather Ferbert said ‌last week that Measure B removes ‍the option of outsourcing from city leaders.

Section ‍117(c) of the charter gives the city the option of engaging ‍in managed competition or using city⁢ forces, she said via email. In ‍the ‌case of Measure B, ⁤that option was given to the⁢ voters. The clear language of the ballot measure specified that city forces would continue to provide trash collection for eligible residences. Measure B does ​not conflict with the City Charter.

Jan Goldsmith, who served as San Diego city attorney from 2008 to ​2016, sees it differently.

Goldsmith said a key factor is that Measure ‌B ⁢amended‍ a city law known as the People’s ‌Ordinance, but it did not amend the city charter, which serves as the city’s constitution.

Based on well-established California Supreme ​Court decisions,the City Attorney’s office‍ has long concluded‌ that,as a Charter ⁤City,San Diego cannot act in conflict with its Charter and that any⁢ act,including the enactment of an ordinance,that violates⁢ or fails ​to ⁣comply‍ with the Charter is void, Goldsmith ‍said via email.

Ferbert’s comments last week were not⁢ part⁤ of a formal legal opinion​ or memorandum of law. In such a ‍document, she could address the issue in greater detail.

Residents frustrated ⁤with the city’s proposed fees may pressure city leaders to consider outsourcing during a March 25 hearing, ⁣when the City Council is expected to⁢ vote on the new rates.

A voluntary opt-out option MUST be ‍offered, with the requirement ‌to contract ‌with​ one of the approved private haulers, said⁤ resident jeff Hamblin in a recent email to the city.

Darling said attendance at a new wave of public forums on the trash fees​ has been roughly double the attendance at ⁢forums held before the proposed rates were revealed.

In public hearings and emails, residents ‍are expressing ⁤their outrage.

This is more than‍ double what was estimated when voters⁢ were asked to consider the measure and exceeds ‌the current rate of surrounding cities that use private trash collection services, said resident Richard Phillips in a recent email.

Residents ‌are also calling for the city to scale back plans for costly new services, notably a plan to spend $16 million to replace all existing blue and ⁣black bins, nonetheless of how new they ⁣are.

Why would they replace all existing black and blue⁣ bins? asked resident Jennifer martin-Roff in⁣ an email. This is unnecessary, as some bins are still in⁣ perfect condition. It would ‍be a waste of money and harmful to the habitat ⁣to dispose of all these ⁢plastic bins. Don’t waste $16 million on ⁤this!