ASHTABULA – Ashtabula City Council member Jane DiGiacomo made a strong statement at the July 6th council meeting in favor of expanding recycling to the rest of the city by saying that council had the opportunity to deliver on the promise of “one city, one standard.”
Following her remarks and comments from other council members, council then voted to purchase recycling and rubbish containers to bring the curbside recycling program to the remainder of the city. The program only has been in place for Wards 1 and 2 and a part of Ward 3 in the city. The city has five Wards.
But the vote didn’t get the full support of council as council President John Roskovics expressed budgetary concerns and cast the lone “no” vote.
By a 5-1 vote, council passed an ordinance authorizing the city manager to purchase recycling and rubbish containers from Wastequip, LLC of Charlotte, N.C., in an amount not to exceed $296,030 to complete the city’s curbside recycling program.
The ordinance states that the city has implemented a curbside recycling program in order to reduce the amount of solid waste going to area landfills for certain portions of the city, and the city desires to complete the program throughout the rest of the city by utilizing funds from the General Fund to purchase the recycling and rubbish containers necessary.
According to city Finance Director Vladimir Kan, the city will now transfer $235,095 from the General Fund to the Sanitation Enterprise Fund and also use $60,935 in leftovers from a recycling grant to pay for the expense.
Roskovics’s opposition to the move, however, didn’t come as a surprise as he had expressed his concerns at the previous June 15th council meeting.
When asked for comment by the Gazette following that meeting, Roskovics had said, “As you know we did not get the recycling grant (from the Ohio EPA) and we do not have extra funds in our sanitation account; therefore, there is no money for new garbage/recycling containers. The thought is to take the $300,000 from the general fund which is allowed in emergency situations. I do not believe buying these trash containers is an emergency. It would be nice to have the whole city recycling, but I don’t think it’s urgent. We have so many more pressing needs. I know a few councilors have been pushing this issue. But I remember lean financial times and how hard the manager and council have worked to create a healthier financial balance. I am considering the big picture so I cannot support this effort.”
At Monday’s July 6 council meeting, DiGiacomo, the Ward V councilor, didn’t leave any question on how she felt, either.
“I want ‘one city, one standard,’” she said. “For nine years, residents in Wards 3, 4, and 5 have paid the same trash fees as everyone else while receiving a lower level of service.”
She said one resident said something that stayed with her. She quoted the person, whom she didn’t name, as saying, “after nine years, it’s not a pilot program anymore. It’s favoritism.”
DiGiacomo said she appreciated the concerns about fiscal responsibility.
“We all share that responsibility,” she said. “I did reach out to our finance director, and his response was clear. The city can afford this purchase without jeopardizing our financial stability. So, tonight, this comes down to fairness. Equal fees should mean equal services. My residents have waited nine years. I believe they’ve waited long enough. Tonight, we have the opportunity to finally deliver on the promise of ‘one city, one standard.’”
Council member RoLesia Holman, the Ward 3 councilor who has pushed for four years to make recycling for the rest of the city a reality, told DiGiacomo that she appreciated her position on the issue.
“And my residents, too, feel that it’s way overdue for them to also be able to receive recycling bins and also contribute to our environment being safer and cleaner,” she said. “It’s a lot of different things tied into one, so I appreciate the outreach to actually hear from our residents across the city.”
Roskovics, however, said he thought what has transpired regarding the issue is really unfortunate.
“This has nothing really to do with recycling,” he said. “Everybody on council is for recycling. We’ve been for it for so many years. Mr. Timonere has been trying to get a grant for this for the longest time, and it just has not happened.”
He thought the city’s financial situation was being jeopardized “because some people want to paint this as a favoritism issue.”
He took exception to claims of “favoritism.”
“And I just now want to say how offensive is that to accuse this council and this administration of playing favoritism,” he said. “It has nothing to do with that. And the city residents in (Wards) 3, 4, and 5 are receiving the same service as the residents in (Wards) 1, 2, and part of 3. They’re getting their garbage picked up, just like everybody else is. And they are paying the same fee as everybody else. Everybody is paying the same fee. In fact, I’ve had residents in Ward 1 and 2 ask me, ‘can they take my recycling can,’ because they’re limited by how much garbage they can put out whereas the residents in the other parts of the city, some are putting out five, six bags at a time if you drive down these streets on trash collection day.”
He said “this really has nothing to do with something being unfair.”
Roskovics said it was offensive to him, as a council member, to be accused of such a thing.
“It’s about money and it’s about being fiscally responsible for the city,” he continued. “And to say it’s anything else other than that – ‘one city, one standard,’ all these little slogans that we get and so forth – it’s unfortunate that you have decided to frame it in that fashion because it’s not true,” he said. “And I think you need to be careful when you’re accusing people of doing something unfair, potentially illegal.”
Referring to comments about how “the rich people are getting their garbage recycled” on social media, he said. “Facebook is nice, but it shouldn’t judge how we act as councilors or city officials.”
City Manager Jim Timonere provided some background about the recycling program.
“Obviously, I got us into this situation, so I will own it,” he said. “The reason that we started curbside recycling was, we picked an area logistically that we thought would work in trying this, without buying any new trucks, without buying any new equipment, by moving around how we were going to pick up garbage, and to see if it would work even if picking up half the city. Certainly, nine years has been long enough. I wouldn’t have proposed this (the ordinance for the containers) if I didn’t feel that we had the finances to so.”
He added that he was glad that the city finance director also believes that the city has the finances for the purchase.
“I very much respect your opinion about the direction of financing that the city has due to the uncertainty of Columbus and certainly the uncertainty of the federal government,” he continued. “I thank you for pointing out this has not been for a lack of trying. And quite frankly, council is in charge of the budget. Any one of these years, any one of you, could have said, ‘Let’s put $400,000 or $300,000 or whatever towards this project.’ Any one of those years, you’re in control of that. So, to say it’s favoritism and things, I do get a little bent out of shape with that as well. However, in today’s political climate, I completely understand why people go to that when they say so.”
Timonere said he wholeheartedly agrees that nine years without recycling for the remainder of the city has been long enough and that everybody should be given the same opportunity.
He provided a timeline for the recycling to get underway for the rest of the city.
“It will still be a couple months before everything is in place, ordered, delivered if council goes and approves this ordinance, which, again, I am recommending you do,” he told council prior to the vote.
He said the city would be getting 2,800 each of the recycling and rubbish containers with the purchase.
