Fee policy is backwards

Sometimes government gets things precisely backwards.

Logic gets lost, and things get upside down.

Consider, for example, the matter of trash pick-up and recycling.

Rural communities like ours have come a long way from the era of the “burn barrel” in the backyard and tossing things in a city dump.

But officials still get things backwards.

Why, for example, should there be fees charged for recycling? 

And why should there be hand-wringing by city officials when the solid waste district’s subsidy for recycling is decreased?

After all, isn’t recycling the ultimate goal?

Fees and budgetary constraints work directly against that target.

Instead, shouldn’t fees be attached to trash collection?

If the goal is to send less stuff to the landfill and encourage recycling, shouldn’t local government craft policies that put a surcharge on trash disposal and make recycling as free and easy as possible?

Ask yourself: If you had to pay a bit for every trash bag you left at the curb but got an incentive to put recyclables out for pick-up, wouldn’t that change your behavior?

You bet it would. Incentives and disincentives work.

But too many local government entities have those backwards: They hide the costs of trash pick-up in the tax rate and charge a fee for recycling.

This is not rocket science, but it seems to be beyond the skills set of those in office. — J.R.