I think that is achievable. The Beck report recommends that very system.
I've seen synopsies of the Beck Report, but have yet to locate a copy. Could you please post a link to the actual report, please?
From what I've seen so far, the Beck plan goes much further than the simplicity stated above, with many limitations/conditions which are not currently in force.
These include those large wheeled containers, no bags, no lawn debris, mechanically-assisted trucks, etc.
There needs to be some discussion of trash at the conceptual level. Our forefathers, in their wisdom, recognized that trash, no matter how much or the source, gets thrown. Where and when is what's to be controlled, not what one considers trash, because if the city doesn't do something with it, the originator will, even if it ends up in the street, in the river or some backwoods drop.
Our current system is designed to accomodate all forms of trash. An customer can even call in special pickups, for free, when objects need special handling, like refrigerators/stoves, mattresses, etc.
In short, it works. It keeps trash off the streets, and keeps people from having to come to their own resolution to a trash issue.
That needs to remain.
Grass clippings in landfill actually has little to do with the evironmental issues being claimed. Rather, is about manpower and space requirements currently being required to do so. It's an overhead cost reduction consideration.
Grass clippings actually assist the biodegradation process. And, if bio-gas capture may be implemented as an energy source, is beneficial.
Plastic bags, at least the trash bags, are now design to biodegrade. At the grocery store, choosing paper, or bringing your own permenent bag, would be the way to go.
Conceptually, the less cumbersome the process is to the customer, the more successful it will be. And, the less misc trash there'll be along our roads, in our rivers or piled up in conspicuous places.
By design, this issue was considered to be a public cause, to keep our city clean. Today's proposals attempt to isolate each customer and charge them for the volume of trash they produce.
Tulsa was once named "America's Cleanest City" (forget what year/s, around 1980 or so, I think). The trash policy is largely the reason for that. But, and this is not a racist comment, it also has to do with customary issues of different places. It seems to me Mexico's national policy on litter did not seem to prepare their citizens for our litter customs here.
So, a public education campaign on litter should once again be implemented. It worked well before at changing us to litter-conscience citizens.
I'm also distressed that Mayor Taylor has now managed to shift normal city mowing and graffiti abatement costs to TARE's surplus funding. That's $750,000/yr now being funded by trash rates which should not be.
Seems it's well on it's way to becoming the Mayors' slush fund.
Anyway, this is going to be discussed at length, I presume.
