OPINION: Tell us more about organic-waste diversion, trash fees
Jan. 22—Reader: Two things caused me to wait in writing this. First, I waited for someone to comment on the Jan. 4 Board of Supervisors meeting's discussion of a huge price increase to Kern County landowners and to my surprise, no one offered any comments.
Second, my wife participated in the board meeting and spoke for Kern County ratepayers as a former county employee and I wasn't sure that writing an editorial about something she was involved in was appropriate. These thoughts and words are my own and I have tried to not be biased. I will let you decide.
I read with interest the Jan. 5 Bakersfield Californian article ("Supervisors delay vote on fee increase to pay for organic-waste diversion") written by Sam Morgen as to what information from the board meeting would be passed on to The Californian's Kern County subscribers. Imagine my surprise when some of the most interesting and consequential discussion points during the meeting were completely overlooked by Mr. Morgen.
In an effort to meet state requirements, Kern County Public Works is proposing a price increase of over 70 percent to manage Kern County residential trash. Combined with the price increase already approved in 2021, Kern County residents will see more than a 100 percent increase going forward. The combined proposed increase will double the Solid Waste Division's budget and cover facilities and equipment that county staff say we need. Now for the interesting and consequential discussion points missed by Mr. Morgen:
—Two supervisors used the term "unprecedented" during the meeting, but not for reasons you might think. Supervisors David Couch and Mike Maggard both used the same term to describe two of the speakers who spoke up against this proposal, former Bakersfield Solid Waste Director Kevin Barnes, and Nancy Ewert, former Kern County assistant director of public works, who was responsible for operations of Kern County's waste facilities. The supervisors used the term "unprecedented" because they had never seen two solid waste experts speak to the board during a board meeting against a proposal submitted by county staff. Very interesting!
—As stated in Mr. Morgen's article, the board was "slated to approve a 71 percent increase to the land-use fee charged to owners of residential land," and without speakers Barnes and Ewert addressing the board, the board would have undoubtedly approved this huge increase.
The fact that it took two experts to speak up and slow down this process is both good and bad. Good in that their expertise was enough for the board to ask quality questions and realize that this topic needed more discussion and bad in that it took two "experts" to make this happen. How often do "experts" speaking in "unprecedented" ways actually make their way up to the podium to discuss any issue before the board? Apparently, never before.
—And finally, both Barnes and Ewert spoke about the facilities and equipment already available and in use in Kern County, and the fact that only a fraction of current capacity is being used. Makes it hard to understand why trash rates need to double!
In summary, a lot more was going on at the Jan. 4 Board of Supervisors meeting than was reported in The Californian. I think it is safe to say that as Kern County residents, we have temporarily dodged a bullet!
— Dave Ewert, Bakersfield
Peterson: Thank you for taking the time to write, Dave. I decided to include your piece in Sound Off, because while you express your opinion on the topic — and provide additional information about the meeting — you also question The Californian's coverage.
Thank you for your summary of the meeting.
As far as our coverage goes, often there is much more that happens in a meeting than we can include in a news story highlighting the main points — or the newsiest. And yes, sometimes people will disagree on the most important points.
I would also point out that we covered this topic rather extensively before the Jan. 4 meeting. Those stories included: "County set to decide on new fees for processing organic waste," Dec. 31; "Land-use fees set to increase to accommodate state law requiring organic material be recycled," Nov. 15; and "Kern sees only pricey options for diverting organic waste," Oct. 16.
The issue is slated to again come before the Kern County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, so expect more coverage.
----Reader: Not really a letter, but I did not know how to contact you so I am trying this. What happened to "Cop Tales" that was in the paper every Monday? I really miss the great stories, and no, I am in no way affiliated with the police department. Thank you for your time.
— Janice Maxwell, Bakersfield
Peterson: The "Cop Tales" column written by retired California Highway Patrol Assistant Chief Brian Smith is no longer publishing. It has nothing to do with the quality of the work; many readers have expressed that they enjoyed reading the stories he included. However, Smith is now running for the 3rd District seat on the Kern County Board of Supervisors, and can't also have a regular community column.
Executive Editor Christine Peterson answers your questions and takes your complaints about The Californian's news coverage in this weekly feedback forum. Questions may be edited for space and clarity. To offer your input by phone, call 661-395-7649 and leave your comments in a voicemail message or email us at soundoff@bakersfield.com. Please include your name and phone number; they won't be published.
