Garbage rates flat, but could they drop?

<p>As Petaluma prepares to transfer its $10 million-a-year garbage contract to a new hauler, the rates residents pay each month will remain familiar.</p><!-- Nothing to do. The paragraph has already been output --><p>The cost of garbage service will stay the same for the next fiscal year — through June 2010 — even as North Bay Corp. takes over from GreenWaste Recovery. The City Council is expected to officially transfer the garbage franchise this fall.</p><p>A report on the current rates found that due to cost decreases, the amount the city owes GreenWaste for the current fiscal year increased only slightly — and enough money had already been paid to cover the increase and leave a surplus remaining.</p><p>The $175,000 surplus will be used for street maintenance, to address the wear and tear garbage trucks have on the city’s streets, the council decided at its July 20 meeting.</p><p>One councilman, who argued that the city should lower garbage rates slightly to account for the surplus, is suggesting that the transfer of the garbage contract to a new hauler is also an opportune time to explore a rate reduction.</p><p>Since North Bay Corp. operates in nearly all of Sonoma County, the city should determine whether its rates can be lowered to match neighboring cities, Councilman Mike Healy said.</p><p>North Bay services all Sonoma County cities except Sonoma and Petaluma, and also operates in some unincorporated county areas.</p><p>The company did not return a call for comment, but in some of the cities it serves, monthly rates are lower than Petaluma’s. In Rohnert Park, for example, customers pay $23.89 every two months for a 32-gallon garbage can.</p><p>In Petaluma, the regular cost for two months’ service with a 35-gallon can is $29.30.</p><p>GreenWaste, which began serving the city in 2006, announced earlier this year it was pulling out of the contract, citing economic reasons.</p><p>Healy said the city and North Bay should discuss whether an extension of the garbage contract — due to expire in 10 years — might allow for new rates that are on par with what others in the county are paying.</p><p>“We should be trying to get those rates here,” he said.</p><p>At last week’s council meeting, he cast the lone vote against the adoption of identical rates for 2009-2010, saying the city should instead use the $175,000 surplus to absorb a “very modest reduction” in the rates.</p><p>“It seems to me that this would be an opportunity to demonstrate good faith with the public — (to show) that when we have an opportunity to reduce rates, even modestly, we’ll do that,” Healy said.</p><p>But other council members agreed with city staff’s recommendation to use the money for additional street repair. Councilmember David Glass estimated that the savings would be only a few dollars a year.</p><p>The $175,000 could be eaten away by the cost of studying which rate class should receive the reduction, he said.</p><p>“I think the best bang for the buck for this community is to take that amount of money and apply it to the streets,” Glass said.</p><p>(Contact Corey Young at corey.young@arguscourier.com)</p>