SB throws out plan to privatize trash collections
By Andrew Edwards
Staff Writer
SAN BERNARDINO -- The City Council has effectively tossed a proposal to privatize waste collection services into the round file.
The council on Monday passed on a proposal from the city manager's office to hire a consulting firm to examine whether outsourcing trash services would make financial sense.
City politicos' lack of interest in the privatizing option suggest that council members -- at least for the time being -- have reached a point where they are reluctant to address San Bernardino's budget problems by reducing city services.
"We do so much outsourcing already," First Ward Councilwoman Esther Estrada said Monday. "I'm really concerned we're going to start outsourcing all services? Are we going to contract with the Sheriff's Office for police?"
The idea of outsourcing Waste Management operations surfaced earlier this year when then-interim City Manager Mark Weinberg suggested privatizing as a means to shore up the city's finances with a one-time cash infusion and possibly a recurring franchise fee.
The idea was brought forward while San Bernardino officials were attempting to solve a $9 million deficit. Acting city manager Lori Sassoon brought the idea back for discussion, saying Monday that the city's financial problems require officials to examine all of their options.
"It is not a pleasant thing to be looking up, but I think your options are extremely limited at this point," Sassoon said.
But the possibility stirred up strong emotions among city employees. Dozens of city workers wearing orange Public Services uniforms showed up to Monday's council meeting in hopes of keeping their department as part of the city.
Public Services employee Charles Greenwood contended that waste hauling services would decline if San Bernardino went forward with outsourcing.
"You own us ... if you vote for privatizing, you have no say," he said.
Fifth Ward Councilman Chas Kelley made a motion to approve Sassoon's recommendation, but 1st Ward Councilwoman Esther Estrada withdrew her second of his motion after discussion.
The proposal died when no other council members offered another second.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
About SB Now Blog
Andrew Edwards. E-mail Andrew here.
OK, the "Elected" have spoken. They have shown their cards and played their hand. In fairness, they should be reminded that this is an election year for some. Report Cards on their performance and accomplishment are now pending.
Also, as they have now demonstrated their level of intelligence should the voters of SB expect this same intelligence to be used to provide a signed and sealed yearly budget which is now due in about 60 days? Cuts, layoffs and reduction in City Services were just used to balance this year’s budget which was costly and very LATE, and now they face next years budget. An extremely tuff and difficult time await the new City Manager and PD Chief. The Council will NOT be able to blame these new members of the leadership team for the budget being late.
The voters of SB have a right to expect these elected individuals to perform or be replaced in this election year. If they do not perform as mandated, we the voters should do as expected and replace the non-performers. We can not afford to have a repeat of last year budget drama for FY 2010 budget approval. Additionally, these elected are being lead by another elected official, the Mayor who, by the way is ALSO up for re-election. His track record not only includes providing (or not) the necessary leadership this City MUST have, but also the budget and his special programs that drained the City of much needed funds, and resulted in criminal charges of one of his manager selectee’s as well as the replacement of the City Manager and Dept heads. This does not mention any pending lawsuits to the City for the less than professional actions within one of the Mayor sponsored programs by the accused.
The question remains, do any of these elected officials up for re-election this year deserve continuance in their current role or position based on the last 4 years performance? Is there still resistance in City Hall to proudly fly the large American Flag at every opportunity without fear of causing a public stir? Is SB better off today than it was in 2005 when they were elected? Has downtown become a model place to come and shop and enjoy or has downtown E Street from Orange Show Road to Highland Ave become an avenue where boarded up commercial establishments out number the open for business establishments that attract or beckon the shopper to forego going to the Redlands Curtis Plaza, or the Ontario Mills or the Victoria Gardens in Rancho to spend, buy and leave their sales tax dollars? Under this administration is SB hemorrhaging and there are no band-aids nor is there anyone schooled in first-aid.
After 4 years, is SB better? The voters MUST decide if they are better off today or is CHANGE needed in the worst way.
The REAL problem is that some wards do not have a "choice". The candidates that run for office are often a choice of who is the least offensive, not who is going to get the job done.
Fleur;
Right; kind of like most elections!
For Fleur & S T...
You are correct, we vote often times for the lesser of the evil, not the most qualified. However, in this case, if these individuals (Council members and Mayor) who are up for re-election are NOT re-elected, it would send a message and open the eyes of the other Council members who will be next go around. Do what is best for the people, listen to those who voted them into office or pack your bags cause you are history! SB needs to clean house big time. Some of the Council have been in office a very long time and accomplished NOTHING for the overall benefit of the City, just catering to special interests within their Wards. Term Limits are needed and overdue!