The city’s proposal to hire a single waste hauler has surprisingly become one of the most contentious issues on our opinion page as of late. In response to this the city conducted a third-party phone survey to gauge public opinion.
Based on these numbers provided by the firm Burns McDonnell, a majority of customers of the city’s largest hauler opposed the city moving forward with the plan.
Of those using the two other companies, a combined total of 50.7 percent supported the plan, which seems like a majority, but it’s not, because these only comprise a total of 37 percent of all respondents, meaning only 18.7 percent actually support moving forward. Calculating the proportional weight of both groups, 47.1 oppose the plan, only 37.7 percent support it.
And these are from the one question on the city’s own survey that was most in favor of the proposal. The other questions revealed residents with all three companies are even less in favor of the city’s proposal.
Of those who contacted the city on their own accord, 78 percent opposed the proposal.
If the city moves forward with the single-hauler plan, it would perhaps save residents a few dollars a month, but not a statistically significant cost savings — not like dropping Internet bills from $100 a month to $50, but dropping garbage bills from $14 a month to $10.
Given all these numbers, it makes no sense that Sedona City Council would still consider moving forward with the proposal and send between $32,000 to $39,000 of taxpayer money on a bidding process which a majority of residents oppose.
One Cottonwood-based, family-owned company already controls a lion’s share of the Sedona market. While other corporate companies based in Flagstaff and Prescott Valley may try to undercut the local company in an RFP process, the cost of service would not be the only factor the city would consider when hiring a single trash hauler. Reputation, public opinion, customer relationships and longevity would also be factors, meaning the city’s largest hauler would likely be the one the city would lean toward. Yet through letters, this company has pushed its customers to actively oppose the plan, meaning even the firm likely to win the contract over its competitors doesn’t want it.
More than 87 percent of residents recycle and most want easier ways to do it, but the single trash hauler would appear to be a lost cause and the city should end this waste of money.
Furthermore, for those who hyperbolically claim choosing a trash company, or any business is a “constitutional” or “civil right” issue, let’s be clear. Choosing which company with which to do business is a cornerstone of the capitalist tradition, but not a “right” enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, any of the 11 Civil Rights Acts nor even the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Men and women did not rebel against unjust rulers, or fight in civil wars, or march in protests, or face beatings, political imprisonment, lynchings, banishment, torture nor summary execution to just hire a company.
By all means, exercise your right to vehemently oppose government waste and political mismanagement, but do not equate the convenience of hiring one company over an other with the men and women who languish in prison or who have died on the altar of freedom around the globe.
