Raucous meeting on new trash fees draws hundreds of angry KRV residents

And many of them were angry over a new system of solid waste management that may be imposed — with higher costs — in the mountain communities northeast of Bakersfield.

Assistant Kern County Public Works Director for solid waste Lisa Shreder was there on behalf of the county providing information, and conducting a long question-and-answer session about controversial changes coming to the Kern River Valley’s solid waste collection and disposal system.

It was not an easy spot to be in for Shreder.

"I read the whole bill," Bodfish resident Lester Standridge told Shreder over the microphone.

Standridge was referring to Senate Bill 1383, a landfill waste reduction mandate aimed at slowing climate change by diverting organic materials from landfills, recovering 20% of edible food and redirecting it to food-insecure Californians.

"It does not mandate putting it on your property taxes," Standridge said of the law.

"You are exactly correct," Shreder answered.

"Then why are you doing it?" Standridge countered.

The room blew up, dozens of attendees talking at once. It would happen several times that night as the passion and anxiety in the room boiled over.

"Wait a minute. Let me answer his question first," Shreder said over the noise.

"The bill does not say it has to go on your property taxes. That's a fact," she said. "But in Kern County, if you have mandatory collection, according to the county ordinance code, it goes on your property taxes. That's a Kern County thing."

At any given moment a dozen to two dozen hands were in the air, everyone wanting to talk at once.

Many spoke of the financial hurt they would be experiencing should the plan become law starting July 1.

Some worried they could lose their homes. 

"No one has to lose their home," Shreder said. "I get it. I get that you don't want it."

The room exploded again.

"If you guys stop screaming at me, I'll start answering questions again."

In the first row, gray-haired David Smith of Lake Isabella spoke into the mic.

"For the past four years I've asked why there is no rate fee schedule for seniors like me," Smith said. "I don't generate a lot of trash. I generate a very small amount of trash."

Cheers and applause erupted in response.

His single trash container sits nearly empty, he said.

"I'm paying a fee for a trash can to sit out there," Smith said. "Now you're saying I have to get two more barrels to sit out there."

KRV residents like Smith who currently use Thomas Refuse, which owns the local solid waste franchise, are receiving one-can service and are paying $27 per month, or $324 yearly.

As of July 1, if the plan is approved by the Kern County Board of Supervisors, those customers will be receiving 3-can service and paying about $560 yearly.

That’s a difference of $236, a nearly 73% increase. And the possibility for future price increases appears to be built into the plan.

One person after another, mostly seniors, took the microphone to say they are on a fixed income, that every dollar taken from their household is a dollar that can't be put toward rising costs, that won't be used to support local businesses and the local economy.

"This is a state mandate. The state did this to you," Shreder told the crowd.

And while many in the audience had plenty of criticism to level at state government, they weren't letting county officials off the hook either.

"Where's Phillip Peters? Where's our 1st District supervisor?" one man yelled before storming out of the building.

Peters was not at the meeting Wednesday, but reached Thursday, he was critical of the plan and promised nothing yet is set in stone.

"The bottom line is this is a state mandate, and I disagree with it completely," Peters said in a text.

The gathering was an informational meeting held by Kern County Public Works, one of many that are being held throughout the county, he said.

In fact, several other communities are included in the Eastern Kern Universal Collection Area currently being affected, including Frazier Park, Tehachapi, Rosamond, Mojave, Boron and Ridgecrest.

"I have discussed this issue with many constituents and I am extremely concerned with the potential impacts of the plans that have been proposed," Peters said. "Nothing is set in stone, and the board hasn't had a chance to publicly weigh in on the proposals yet, but we will be discussing options at the May 23rd meeting."

But it's not going to be easy for supervisors to say no, even if they disagree philosophically with the state mandate.

"The state is threatening the county with fines that could equal $14 million a year which would be devastating to the county's budget and ability to provide services if we don't comply," said Peters, who added that the cost of providing this service "could also be devastating" to many families, especially those on a fixed income.

He and others, he said, are working on a solution "that will both satisfy state requirements and prevent this huge fee from impacting property owners."

He encouraged homeowners who oppose the proposal to send a written protest.

Written protests are indeed one of the ways organizers against the proposal are fighting back.

"So right now, our protest is just ideally going to stop the increase in the trash fee. It's a Prop 218 protest, so that's all that we've been given so far," said Ashley Fike, one of those leading the growing opposition to the solid waste plan.

"The next step, I think, is for us to coordinate with Supervisor Peters to investigate how to make an actual change to this implementation plan that isn’t going to disproportionately affect the low income and senior residents here."

They also need to change the county ordinance that requires the county to add the new trash fees to the tax roll.

"Maybe we have to pull whatever legal weight we have to demand transparency from the county for the plan they have in place," she said. "There are a lot of options, and we're definitely discussing them all."

Even if valley residents ultimately have to pay more, Fike and her allies plan to demand the data that went into the plan.

"The unincorporated Kern County community is some 300,000 strong," she said, "and to be treated so dismissively by the county government should give everyone pause."