By Dennis Volkert
At its meeting Nov. 12, Sturgis City Commission plans to hold a second reading of a proposed ordinance for curbside recycling.
The board’s first review was conducted at the Oct. 22 meeting.
Curbside recycling was offered citywide beginning in 2008. The current contract with Borden Waste Away ends Dec. 31. Renewal would involve a $6 to $8 increase per month for residents, on the utilities bill.
In recent months, commissioners have discussed and debated several options:
- Extend the service, at a higher cost for residents.
- Allow the agreement to lapse, but develop a ballot measure can be presented to voters.
- Provide drop-off locations instead of curbside collection.
- Drop the service entirely.
Most commission members have shared feedback from constituents whether to continue the service in some fashion. Several residents have spoken to the commission during public comment segments, both in support and against the recycling program.
Two commissioners have been outspoken regarding the topic and process, with somewhat opposite views.
Marvin Smith, commissioner in 3rd Precinct, has been the most vocal against the ordinance approach.
“I actively dislike this proposal for several reasons,” Smith said. “When the government charges you for something, it’s a tax. Call it a fee if you want, it’s still a tax on the residents. It is also a tax on small business.”
Aaron Miller, at-large commissioner, has pushed to explore all options to continue the service.
“My family and I value Sturgis’ current recycling program and we value the general concept of recycling, too,” Miller said. “Thus far, since it became announced that our recycling program will cease on January 1 with no further action from our commission, feedback I’ve received from my constituents has generally shown favor for continuing our recycling program in some fashion.”
Miller says he is in favor of the ordinance draft that has been presented to the commission by city staff.
“(It) changes funding mechanisms for our program because of a cap in Michigan law that no longer allows the status quo,” he said. “I prefer the offered three-year contract option from our currently contracted third party for recycling, because it offers a savings of $2 per month compared to the one-year contract option … But I believe the one-year contract option is a good potential compromise if other commissioners would like a shorter test period for trying this new funding mechanism.”
Smith insists a ballot measure is the only sensible approach.
“The people need to decide this in a referendum vote. This should not be decided by the commission,” Smith said. “Once the commission sets it, it’s not going to go away, no matter what the price, even though they can.”
Smith called the ordinance a “socialist program” that is “an undue tax on the residents and many small businesses.
“If a person wants to recycle, they can, but their neighbors should not have to pay for it,” he said.
Prior to approval of the ordinance’s first review of the proposal, 2nd precinct commissioner Justin Wickey said he believes an ordinance is a viable short-term solution, allowing time for residents to respond and reducing the risk of losing the service permanently.
“My view is, do a one-year, put out a survey, and hear back,” Wickey said. “If we vote it down now, we might not get it back.”
