[cabo35]

I debated whether to give this its own thread and decided to go for it. I hope the administrator agrees. It really is a different unique issue and hopefully will resolve some of the confusion evident on recycling pickups, although I am not sure it will definatively answer the question.

The once a week pickup issue connected with recycling has raised many questions. Some people read it, some saw it differently and some said it was never printed. I cut and pasted this article from the December issue of the POA Bulletin I found on line.

Whoa !! Wait a minute !!

Let’s spend some time thinking through in more detail this matter of Recycling before we get locked into something we may not really want !!

The basic proposal that appears to be close to implementation now includes the following:

Once-a-week curbside pickup of a special bag we must purchase and into which we put all recyclables (paper, cardboard, plastic, glass, and aluminum cans),

Only one pickup a week (rather than two) of all other household trash,

An additional monthly charge on our trash bill of $2.00,

No passback to residents of any profits on the sale of the recycled materials.

Only one pickup a week (rather than two) of all other household trash, An additional monthly charge on our trash bill of $2.00, No passback to residents of any profits on the sale of the recycled materials.

This decision about whether to recycle or not is being made by the developer of The Villages. This is because all Villagers agreed to give the developer the exclusive (and assignable) right in our home’s purchase agreement to collect our residential solid waste.

Recycling is a good way to do our part to make a better world. However, let’s be smart, not foolish, in how we do this.

We have no problem with the idea of putting all recyclables into a bag for once-a-week curbside pickup. This seems a reasonable way to do things without requiring specialized trucks, containers, or procedures.

However, only once-a-week pickup for basic household trash is not a good idea. One of the reasons we have twice-a-week pickup now is that garbage deteriorates quickly in our heat and the smell can quickly get overpowering. Stretching out the pickup to once-a-week will aggravate the situation. And, if you miss a pickup, you have to hold trash two weeks rather than a few days for another pickup. This is not a good idea.

On the matter of the additional $2.00 a month charge, why do we have to pay this when we will get one less general trash pickup a week? The additional $2.00 fee is directed at the recycling effort; thus, the trash company will charge the same monthly fee and have the regular pickup effort and cost cut in half. Remember, also, that the tipping charge at a landfill will be reduced by the weight of recyclable materials that no longer have to be dumped in a landfill.

So, the trash company gets its workload and costs reduced by 50%, gets its landfill tipping charge reduced by x%, and gets an extra $2.00 (a 12.9% increase) monthly.

Something is wrong here.

Now, what about the profits on the sale of recycled materials (paper, cardboard, plastic, glass, and aluminum cans)? Who gets that?

Please don’t try to tell us that there is no profit on recycled materials. If there was no profit, then no company would be doing it.

Currently, newspapers are recycled by the local churches; aluminum cans by the Lions Club and a few others. These organizations would not be doing recycling if there was no profit in it. Incidentally, these activities can continue quite nicely, thank you, if we don’t decide to recycle under this proposal.

So, if there is profit in the recycling business, then Villagers should participate in those profits. If there are no profits, then that is what the $2.00 a month is for. If that does not cover it, then maybe we shouldn’t be doing recycling in the first place.

Ok, how do we resolve these issues?

I hope this vindicates those who some suggested did not read it, made it up, jumped on the wrong bandwagon or misrepresented facts. We're all in the same boat and have a need for reliable media reporting. The Village Sun gives a contradictory account that almost seems like a direct response to the Recycle Poll or the POA article. The articles are polar opposites and the confusion really needs to be cleared up so that everyone knows what is going on. I should note that the POA article appeared before the Village Sun explanation.

Who do we believe?