Commentary: It helps if there is a reason

But the great majority of you followed the city govemment's dictate. You bagged the leaves and put them on the parkway. Eventually, the bags were hauled to a composting site estahlished to reduce the need for lamdfills by turning high-volume waste materials into their low-volume, soil-enriching organic components.

It was the same process as last year except for one major change. Last year you raked your leaves to the street, then city employees picked up the leaves with a suction device mounted on a truck. This year you bought clear plastic bags, filled them with leaves and put them on the parkway. City employees then threw the bags into a truck which carried them away.

A signiftcant difference? I think so.

For starters, how much did the clear plastic bags cost you? Since you could not use just any kind of bags or reusable containers, you had to buy clear plastic bags at about 25 cents each. What was the total?

An average of the bags put on the parkway of three block-faces in my neighborhood (Avon and Crapo streets between Second and Kearsley streets) is probably typical of Flint block-faces. The west side of Crapo has small yards, the west side of Avon has medium yards and the east side of Avon has large yards.

Based on these three block-faces, the average responsible property owner (someone who complied with the government dictate) used at least 10 to 15 plastic bags at a cost of $2.50 to $3.75.

Depending on how you look at it, you either made a small, non-deductible, non-voluntary contribution to your city government or you paid another non-legislated tax assessed Flint property owners.

If you figure that there are about 40,000 residential structures in Flint, property owners paid $100,000 to $150,000 to meet a city dictate to buy clear plastic bags for leaves. That is a lot of money to pay to hold bags of leaves carried to a compost heap in trucks when the same leaves could be carried to the heap in trucks without residents having to pay $100,000 or more for unnecessary plastic bags.

Next, consider the labor involved in bagging leaves.

Your city government does not calculate the labor cost of complying with its dictates if the cost does not affect its budget. But you are legally responsible for paying the increased labor cost of its revised leaf disposal requirements.

How much did it cost you personally? One of my neighbors estimated that it took at least 50 to 60 percent more time to bag the leaves this year than it took to rake the leaves to the street in past years. If bagging leaves is your hobby, you had 50 to 60 percent more pleasure this year. If not, you paid someone 50 to 60 percent more to clear your lawn or you spent 50 to 60 percent more time (at whatever your time is worth) to do it yourself. That is time or money you spent because a government bureaucrat told you to do it, not time or money you spent because you wanted to do it. That is another non-legislated tax you paid.

Why were the leaf collection regulations changed? Undoubtedly, the bureaucrat who came up with the idea had an argument that convinced his bosses to change a process that had worked for years.

What was the argument?

Savings for govemment? I doubt it. The old system of picking up leaves with a suction device seems as cost-efftcient as the "new" system of picking up and throwing bags of leaves into a truck.

Environmental benefits? Forcing people to use a great quantity of plastic will not win the city government any environmental protection awards.

Economic benefits? Although a lot of money was spent on bags it is doubtful that bag sales significantly affected the local economy.

Political benefits? Enacting regulations which unnecessarily penalize the average property owner is usually a political liability for those in charge. But could there actually be a less obvious political motive? Is it possible that enacting the policy was a subtle way to get your support for the administration's continuing attempt to dismantle the city's trash collection system and replace it with a private firm?

If that is the case, then at least the administration had a reason for the policy change. And believing that there was actually a reason for such a seemingly irrational policy decision makes me feel a whole lot better about my government.

GPC