Residents want to ‘trash the tax’

SB 1383 is meant to reduce organic waste in landfills, where it contributes to methane production. Methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change.

“This thing has not been thought well-through,” organizer Larry Grooms said. “From the beginning it was based on good intentions and flawed science.”

The city’s organic waste will be transported to a new facility in Bakersfield, where it will be processed into methane gas that will be used to power Waste Management’s dump trucks.

“We believe that the increase that the City of Lancaster is considering for Waste Management exceeds the value of the program and should be rejected,” Grooms said.

The City Council previously approved a resolution to amend the city’s existing agreement with WM (formerly Waste Management) stating the base rate for solid waste collection for single-family dwellings to provide basic three-cart service would be set at about $450 a year, or at $37.55 a month.

Grooms said the proposed fee hike should go before the entire population for a vote.

Lancaster sent notices to 39,789 parcels in the city. The notices were mailed to “current resident” and printed in eight-point and six-point type and were virtually unreadable, Grooms said, adding some people unknowingly threw out the card.

Adding the solid waste collection fee to the tax rolls “didn’t really sit right with me,” speaker Kathy Ragan said. “Once they go on a tax roll we have no say, no vote as to how often they will raise the tax for this.”

She said the city needs to figure out the cost for each property, individually, and go by that.

Patrick Saatzer, a retired US Air Force colonel who holds a doctorate in astrophysics, reviewed a 2017 comprehensive study conducted by the state consultant, Natural Resources Defense Council Inc., a nonprofit environmental advocacy group.

“The results show that 70% of food waste comes from large facilities,” he said.

Saatzer estimated an average restaurant produces more than one ton of food waste in one week.

“For a single family home, it’s less than five pounds per week,” he said. “A similar study should be conducted in the Antelope Valley to find out most of that waste is coming from restaurants.”

He said Waste Management should not be required to collect food waste from residents weekly due to the low amount of waste.

He also said there is no justification to add the proposed fee to the property taxes.

“If they pass this, we get an attorney and we sue,” Saatzer said. ‘There’s nothing wrong with the current way we do it.”

Closing the news conference, Grooms offered some suggestions. One was for the City Council to cancel the July 26 public hearing on the proposed increased and put the proposed increase on the Nov. 8 ballot.

“If that’s not possible, then maybe the city should do what cities are inclined to do — stand up and protect their local citizens,” he said.

Speaker Fred Flores can’t afford additional fees on his property taxes.

“I do not want to pay additional monies on our property taxes,” he said.

The costs for apartment dwellers will also increase.

“Right now, people barely make enough money to survive right now and it’s not going to get any better; it’s going to get worse,” Flores said.

A public hearing scheduled for the July 12 City Council meeting could not take place due to the lack of a quorum. However, Vice Mayor Marvin Crist allowed the people in attendance to speak on the proposed increase.

Lancaster could be fined up $10,000, per day, if the City Council took no action.

“We’ve kicked the can as far down the road we possibly could,” Crist told at the meeting. “The state is saying that they will not give us extra time.”

The deadline to notify Los Angeles County of the proposed higher fees is in August, to get the proposed increase on the December tax bill. In the meantime, residents are not expected to get a Waste Management bill.

The public hearing was rescheduled to 5 p.m., July 26 in council chambers at City Hall, 44933 Fern Ave.

Because the proposed solid waste fee increase is considered a user fee, state law allows the election to be a protest vote, which would require a majority protest.

The only way to protest the proposed hike is by sending a letter (with the assessor’s parcel number and home address) via mail to the City of Lancaster, 44933 Fern Ave., Lancaster, CA 93534, Attn: Kathleen Stenback, Deputy City Clerk, or presenting it at the conclusion of the public hearing.

jdrake@avpress.com