Earlier this year, the Los Angeles City Council approved an environmentally conscious garbage collection program aimed at reducing the amount of trash dumped at city landfills with “transparent and predictable” rates for property owners.
But now the Los Angeles Times reports that a group of apartment owners has challenged the legality of the program in court, arguing that it violates state requirements for new taxes on property owners.
The lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court last week by the Apartment Owners Association of California, along with two local residents. According to the Times, it alleges the new rate structure imposed by the Zero Waste LA initiative amounts to a tax—and thus should have been submitted to voter approval under Proposition 218, which requires a citywide vote on tax increases affecting property owners.
The initiative, which is scheduled to go into effect next month, will allow the city to award trash collection contracts for commercial, industrial, and multifamily properties to private companies. According to an announcement from Los Angeles City Councilmember Jose Huizar’s office, 70 percent of LA’s trash comes from such properties.
City leaders expect the plan—which would also provide residents and workers with an additional 65,000 recycling bins—to lower the amount of landfill disposal a full 1 million tons per year by 2025.
The lawsuit, however, maintains that property owners, who have previously been able to pick their own garbage hauling companies, could see the price of trash collection “double or even triple,” as the Times reports.
The result of the lawsuit could have major ramifications for the new trash collection arrangement and the ability of the city council to make decisions that would affect utility fees for owners of commercial properties. It’s unlikely to affect homeowners and residents of multifamily buildings with four units or less. Their garbage hauling needs will continue to be handled by the Bureau of Sanitation, even after the Zero Waste LA program debuts.
- Apartment owners sue city of L.A., saying trash pickup program needed voter approval [LA Times]
- Million-Dollar Trash Push Coming to Area South of Downtown LA [Curbed LA]
- The Dirtiest Streets in LA, Mapped [Curbed LA]
- 18 simple ways to live green in LA [Curbed LA]
Comments
So the City forces us to use one garbage company as opposed to calling the four of them and getting the best price, and somehow our rates are going to go down? How exactly does that happen when the one company knows we have to pay them whatever the city allows them to charge?
By LADude on 06.12.17 2:23pm
Hello, would you be kind enough to list off who those four companies are? And if you know, who has the best residential rate? I moved here pretty recently and very bummed out to be paying $60 a month with no apparent option, especially when I generate virtually no trash whatsoever. Thank you.
By Your Enthusiasm on 06.12.17 4:31pm
If you live in the City of Los Angeles, in a house or duplex, your rate is $35.32/month for a single black can, $24.33 if you live in an apartment of 3-5 units, and your pickup service is billed via DWP, every two months. You have no choice of collection other than the city, and you cannot opt-out.
If you’re billed by DWP, and you’re paying $120/bill, they’re likely charging you for cans you don’t have.
Good luck if that’s the case; be prepared for a long, entrenched battle that will last for years and years.
By smartalex on 06.13.17 10:07am
I lied, it was 3. Athens (the one we use), Republic and Waste Management. Every year they try to raise my rates so I call all three and use that to negotiate Athens down. Now I will only have one option and since the government is involved it will probably cost twice as much.
By LADude on 06.13.17 11:07am
"Environmentally conscious garbage collection program." SMDH, you can’t make this stuff up. Yet another burdensome and unnecessary "feel good" tax on apartment building owners. And folks wonder why the rent is too damn high.
By DJCRoy on 06.12.17 2:59pm
From Eco-Friendly "Claims", to gross monopolistic city run incompetence; welcome to liberal visions.
By LeBasque on 06.12.17 5:46pm
The commercial trash collection consolidation program has nothing to do with the environment, and everything to do with creating monopolies that can be unionized.
Under the state’s "leadership", commercial trash rates have already more than doubled. How much higher can they go?
Perhaps if the city saw its way to bill tenants directly for multifamily trash services (along with free recycling and bulky item pickups), this madness would cease.
By smartalex on 06.13.17 10:07am
Well said smartalex & LeBasque. Under the thin veneer of leftism and its accompanying dogma of environmentalism, we have nothing but old fashioned liberal machine politics and big union corruption. The progressive lemming voters of LA are so easily manipulated, even by this city’s simpleton leadership (look how they got everyone stirred up over that Paris accord foolishness), that in the end all you can say is that we have the local government we deserve.
By DJCRoy on 06.13.17 10:37am
"The progressive lemming voters of LA are so easily manipulated, even by this city’s simpleton leadership"
Yes, because the Conservative lemming voters of this country weren’t easily manipulated by this joke of a President. Lets go over some things these voters were manuipulated /lied about:
(1) Trump would take out ISIS in his first 100 days of office (False)
(2) Mexico would pay for the wall (False, Congress was asked to pay for it and refused. Hence no wall)
(3) Trump would restore American Respect/Leadership on the Global Stage (Do I need to list the number of Countries and allies that are turning their backs on us. Trump is in the process of canceling a trip to Britain (historically one of if not THE best ally) because of the MASSIVE protests planned for him, just to name a few)
(4) Trump would bring back Coal Jobs (Still waiting for this one. Wonder how he’s going to do so, given market conditions that are snuffing coal out, like the rise of Natural Gas)
(5) Lock Her Up (False yet again)
(6) Obama wasn’t born here (False yet again)
(7) Stop and Frisk (a policy originated in NYC) was effective in bringing down crime. (False. The Mayor, Police union, US Judicial system and many others have already ruled this was an "Ineffective policy that amounted to little more than Racial profiling and the suspension of the victims rights")
(8) North Korea would not be allowed to continue their ballistic military program (False. and the number of rocket launches has increased)
(9) Chinese currency manipulation will be address (False)
(10) Trumps condemnation of Obama + Bush Golf trips, saying when he was in office he wouldnt do the same (In the same time period 4 first months, Trump had more golf trips than Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Reagan
(11) He would release his tax returns (False)
(12) He would Ban Muslims from entering the country (False Blocked 3 times by the courts. And now hes trying to water down his candidate Trump Muslim Ban)
Seems like Liberals are the only ones being easily manipulated. But let me guess, you’re one of those drones who believes Trump is the greatest president ever, never lies, will bring back jobs better than we could ever believe, and that "we would win so much we’d get tired of it"
By USCTrojan90 on 06.13.17 4:13pm
And yes, we deserve and much rather prefer our "Liberal" government in comparison to the terrible conservative governments, like that failed disaster in Kansas. Oh you know, the failed experiment far right conservatives thought would prove LOW TAXES across the board would yield un-precedented economic growth? Yea how’d that end up? Largest budget deficit in 30 years (minus the height of the recession), and his own Republican Conservative state legislature vetoing his absurd budget.
So by all means, feel free to relocate yourself to one of those states. B/c staunch conservative Republican run states are doing SOOOOOOO much better than Liberal / Moderate run states. Our economy (CA, NY, WA, OR, VA, Mass, ect) are all doing soo much worse than conservative states. Alabama, Mississippi, Alaska, Arkansas, are doing soo well. hahahahahahahaha.
By USCTrojan90 on 06.13.17 4:17pm
Texas is doing quite well for itself and they don’t have a state income tax.
By Fonzooooo on 06.13.17 4:35pm
@Fonzooo Texas is one example. There are PLENTY more examples on the liberal/moderate side Not to mention that across various sources (Forbes, Business Insider, CNN, NYT and Wikipedia which cites reputable sources), the bottom 10-15 state economies (using GDP and economic growth among other factors) are all staunch conservative states.
I mean we all know the south and midwest (generally conservative) arent doing well. That was part of Trump’s whole pitch, that those areas were forgotten during the economic revival and that they were suffering unlike Coastal Liberal Big States.
By USCTrojan90 on 06.13.17 5:26pm
@Fonzooo Also their lack of state income tax is not the sole, or major reason why they are doing so well. Their sheer size, coupled with their oil industry is one of the largest factors of their economy. If no state income tax alone was the cause of their economic success, Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, Wyoming, New Hampshire and Tennessee would be doing fine and dandy…and they certainly are not economic power houses. (Bold states are those not near the top 10/15 best economies)
By USCTrojan90 on 06.13.17 5:35pm