St. Louis County government to hold town hall meeting

BY PAUL HAMPEL • phampel@post-dispatch.com > 314-727-6234

South St. Louis County • Residents will have a chance to meet with St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley and other officials at a town hall meeting in south county on Wednesday and Oct. 19.

The Oct. 19 meeting will be at the Bernard Middle School gymnasium, 1054 Forder Road.

The meeting will start with an open house from 6:30 to 7 p.m., with displays and materials highlighting government services. Residents can speak with government staff about issues affecting their neighborhoods.

From 7 to 7:30 p.m., government staff will give presentations about projects and events in south county.

A question-and-answer session with Dooley will be from 7:30-8:30 p.m.

For more information, call Lori Fiegel with the county planning department at 314-615-2520

More Comments on County Trash Program Liability

For the first time since three trash haulers (American Eagle, Meridian, and Waste Management) won their lawsuit against St. Louis County for its failure to provide the required “two-year notice” before implementing its controversial trash districting program, the county has reluctantly admitted that it may be on the hook to pay out $23 million to the haulers. The trial date for the hearing to determine damages is set for May 31 in the St. Louis County Circuit Court of Judge Barbara Wallace.

Reputable sources close to the court indicate that the county has exhausted all of its delay tactics and that the judge has denied the county’s most recent request for yet another continuance, thus indicating, “Let’s get the show on the road,” borrowing the title of a song by musician/songwriter, Michael Stanley.

Based on his responsibility as the county’s financial advisor with respect to the issuance of bonds, Jeff White of Columbia Capital Management LLC, has advised St. Louis County “of the need to disclose on the Preliminary and Official Statement the potential that a $20+ million judgment may be entered against St. Louis County, Missouri, in the case of American Eagle Waste Industries, LLC et al. v. St. Louis County, as a result of the trial judge having entered summary judgment on the issue of liability and having overruled the defenses proposed to be offered by St. Louis County, for the reason that such a judgment could have an impact on the ability of St. Louis County to conduct operations.”

White further advises the county that ”the actual entry of a judgment of $20+ million against St. Louis County would likely have a negative impact on St. Louis County’s bonding capacity as to future special obligation bond issuances.” In other words, Mr. White has advised his client, St. Louis County, that it has immersed itself in a pretty deep substance, that the handwriting is on the wall, and be prepared to write three very large checks. But, it will be the county taxpayers who will end up paying for St. Louis County’s buffoonery.

Until now, county counselor, Patricia Redington, has attempted to downplay that the county may have to pay out any damages and she has also proclaimed that the county has been successful in all of the lawsuits, which is a pipedream on her part. If that were the case, the county would not be in the quandary that it is in today. Some people have likened Redington’s ludicrous statements to her “being on a bad acid trip.”

Class Action Suit Says Trash System is Illegal; Involves All County Residents; Hearing Set for Aug. 18

A class action law suit filed in behalf of all St. Louis County Residents on September 14, 2009 will have a hearing next Wednesday, August 18, 2010. The basis of the suit claims the establishment of trash districts within the county is illegal and creates a monopoly.

A spokesperson for Citizens in Opposition to Monopoly Trash Districts (COMTD) urges St. Louis County residents to attend this hearing on August 18. The location is the Missouri Court of Appeals, 815 Olive Blvd. in downtown St. Louis (Old Post Office) at 9:30 a.m., Division 5, Third Floor.

In law, a class action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people (county residents) collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants (St, Louis County) is being sued. Consumer organizations (COMTD) may bring claims on behalf of large groups of consumers (county residents). The law suit in question here involves all residents of St. Louis County as a group bringing a claim to the courts.

(Click Graphic to Enlarge)

NOAH TODAY

In the year 2008, the Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in the United States, and said:
"Once again, the earth has become wicked and over -populated, and I see the end of all flesh before me."

"Build another Ark and save 2 of every living thing along with a few good humans."

He gave Noah the blueprints, saying:

"You have 6 months to build the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40 nights."

Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his yard - but no Ark.
"Noah!," He roared, "I'm about to start the rain!

Where is the Ark?"
"Forgive me, Lord," begged Noah, "but things have changed."

"I needed a building permit."

"I've been arguing with the inspector about the need for a sprinkler system."

"My neighbors claim that I've violated the neighborhood zoning laws by building the Ark in my
yard and exceeding the height limitations. We had to go to the Development Appeal Board for a decision."

"Then the Department of Transportation demanded a bond be posted for the future costs of moving power lines and other overhead obstructions, to clear the passage for the Ark's move to the sea. I told them that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear nothing of it."

"Getting the wood was another problem. There's a ban on cutting local trees in order to save the spotted owl." "I tried to convince the environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls - but no go!"

"When I started gathering the animals, an animal rights group sued me. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their will. They argued the accommodations were too restrictive, and it was cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space."

"Then the EPA ruled that I couldn't build the Ark until they'd conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood."

"I'm still trying to resolve a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on how many minorities I'm supposed to hire for my building crew."

"Immigration and Naturalization are checking the green-card status of most of the people who want to work."

"The trades unions say I can't use my sons. They insist I have to hire only Union workers with Ark-building experience."

"To make matters worse, the IRS seized all my assets, claiming I'm trying to leave the country illegally with endangered species."

"So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least 10 years for me to finish this Ark."

"Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, and a rainbow stretched across the sky."

Noah looked up in wonder and asked,
"You mean you're not going to destroy the world?"

"No," said the Lord.
"The GOVERNMENT beat me to it."

County Residents Speak Out

County residents have been vocal in their feelings about no freedom of choice regarding their selection of a trash hauler. The following are comments posted by various residents. These can also be found under COMMENTS with the various articles at this site.

Comments received:

Charlie Dooley does owe the citizens of St. Louis County a great big Apology. He has now mismanaged this program into costing Taxpayers 10's of millions of Dollars. How incompetent do things have to get? St. Louis County needs a change of leadership.

-------------------

Let's face it....... St. Louis County, is NOT a good stewart of our Tax Money. Dooley said he was doing this to help and protect county residents. The only thing we need protection from is Dooley and his follow behind knuckleheads.

-------------------

It's time to shake the County Government blanket and elect new leadership. This is ridiculous. Their track record sucks.

-------------------

When you start adding up what this program cost the taxpayers, it is really scarey. In the beginning, the County was taking our tax dollares through fees at the landfills, they were hidden taxes, but over the years, it surpassed nearly $10 million over the years.

Then, they purchased recycle carts and handed them out like candy, this program cost over $4.5 million, with no control over the carts.

Then they bid the Districts and caused mass confusion costing well over $. 5 half a million, now add in the county government cost of defending itself in court over this bad decission.

Then, there will be a settlement with the loosing companies which could easily gover well over $5 million or more............

All of this over a simple system of competitive trash collection that wasn't broke, and was working. County government at it's best.

Good work guys and gals. You should be proud of yourself.

It's no wonder the County is having money problems..............

Oooppps, it us that are having the money problems, we pay for it.

-------------------

This issue isn't over. And I predict that we will not unwind the clock. The damage has been done.

The big question is, how much is it going to COST us taxpayers. The County will be forced to reach a settlement with the haulers that were damaged and pay damages for their loss of business. That will run into the multiple millions of dollars.

But the Districts and the contract agreements will stand and will be carried out as set up. If the county trys to cancel the awarded contracts and unwind things, the companies that were awarded the contracts will sue for their damages. So, settlement with the loosing companie is the lesser of two evils.

No one wins here. The existing companies lost their business, the people lost thier right to choose, the taxpayers will be paying for everything, the low prices that were awarded will be ramped up because of the settlement.But, not to worry, no one in the County will loose their jobs....not Dooley, not Earls, not Redington, no one.............just everyone else looses.

Good work County Government.

-------------------

The trash program itself was not a bad idea, and similar programs are being implemented all over the country- it really appears to be unavoidable. I realize some people fret over their right to choose, but trash service is essentially a utility and they do not have a choice over any of their other utilities- why? Because it’s more cost effective.

The follow through of the County does suck.

They should have been upfront about this and done this through a municipal tax type of program- if it went up for vote it would have passed. Despite what people like to think most people are thankful for this program they realize the obvious benefits and are not afraid to give up their "right to choose" over something that is so trivial.

It’s a good idea and in the end will be implemented but a lot of headaches and possibly some costs could have been saved if they would have just done this through a county taxed program.

One comforting thought is that the tax money that may be awarded to some of these companies as a result of various lawsuits will all be recovered by the people who use these services in less than a year’s time through the financial savings it offers to the customer.

I full heartedly agree that this was done sloppily, and that the county government needs to be more upfront and accountable - but the rest of the complaints really have no validity.

Freedom of Choice, Low Rates, Custom Service Cited by Resident

The headache that just won't go away

“Our subdivision chose to opt out of the county’s trash program mainly due to the politics involved and our desire for freedom of choice. With the county’s assigned trash collector, if you are unhappy with the service, you are unable to change to another hauler. Opting out gives us the freedom to change.

We also have the freedom of not insisting that all residents of our subdivision have a designated trash hauler. We have at least two home owners who carry their trash to their place of business for disposal. They don’t need a trash or recycling service at their home.

My personal trash bill for once a week trash service early this year was $9.50 plus surcharges for fuel, etc. It jumped to around $20 a month when they started billing for recycling (which I did not request). It jumped further to more than $25 per month. Our subdivision chose our own hauler for trash and recycling at $15 per month minus 10% for seniors. While we may be paying a buck or two more, it’s worth it to have the ability to change and not have to put up with the politics of the County Government.

I don’t mind paying for recycling, but I did not order the service with my old hauler which was IESI. They keep billing me but I informed them they need to bill the party that ordered the service – St. Louis County. Since I no longer do business with IESI, I went ahead and ordered recycling with my new hauler and am glad to pay for the service.

The law suit? I believe there were two. The one was ruled on by the Missouri Supreme Court, but the other is making its way through the legal system questioning the requirement of the County Charter to put the trash program to a vote of the citizens. Stay tuned.

The next question is what happens if the courts rule against St. Louis County and require them to put the program to a vote? Does this mean the trash haulers collected money for a recycling program that was illegal for the county to implement? Will the haulers refund the money collected back to the residents who paid them?”

. . . . Anonymous
..

Florissant Mayor Addresses Increase in Trash Hauling Fees; Says "Do Not Pay"

Recently, Mayor Robert G. Lowery, Sr. said that Florissant City Hall is receiving a large number of telephone calls from the residents in the City of Florissant inquiring why the trash haulers have added an additional fee for recycling. Mayor Lowery wants all of Florissant’s citizens to realize that the City has nothing to do with the rise in the customers’ pick ups. It is the result of an ordinance passed by St. Louis County’s Council and the haulers are increasing their fees due to an additional pick up. The Mayor stated that although he thinks the ordinance is meaningful and in the best interest of all of the County, it has caused a lot of confusion with County residents.

City residents should not pay a new surcharge on trash bills for recycling pickup until officials determine whether a county requirement that haulers provide the service applies to Florissant, Mayor Robert Lowery says.

St. Louis County implemented the ordinance with the intent to further participation in recycling efforts but a lot of citizens are opposed because it was mandated without a vote of the people and they do not want to pay additional fees. Mayor Lowery wanted to clarify his position and that of the Florissant City Council that they are whole-heartedly in support of recycling but are opposed to the mandate to the vendors in the City without the permission of businesses and homeowners.

Mayor Lowery asks that anyone who has a problem with this new ordinance to contact St. Louis County government at 314-615-HAUL. Please do not contact Florissant City Hall on this matter as we have no jurisdiction.

Click here for more information: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/D44FA4BF64BEFD2D8625741800138F29?OpenDocument

.

County Issues Demand to Trash Haulers

John Hassis of the County Health Department has announced to the Trash Haulers serving under license by the County that his department is demanding that effective April 1, 2008 that every hauler start to CHARGE every one of their customers for once a week recycling pick-up even if they do not use the service. His implied threat is that if it is discovered that a hauler is not charging their customers for the service that their licenses may be revoked as “not being in compliance” with regulations.

The big question to the County Council itself is:

"We understand that the county haulers have agreed to OFFER the minimum level of trash services to all of their customers. What ordinance or regulation gives the Health Department the authority to force trash haulers to charge customers who do not want to use a service such as bulk pickup or recycling for that service?"

This situation is begging for a class action law suit.

New St. Louis County trash service standards take effect

Trash haulers in St. Louis County must make once-a-week recycling pickups, or take measures that have the same effect, under new trash collection service standards that start Tuesday.

Now, about a third of the county's households receive this service, and the remainder have the option of getting it. Most households in the unincorporated area lack the service, as do about half of those in municipalities. The standard encourages "single-stream" recycling, where householders deposit all recyclable materials in a single container; sorting takes place at the places where haulers drop off these materials.

(Note: this is part of an article in the St. Louis Post Dispatch. For the entire article, click here.
Or click on this link:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/4355D6903ABC7B1B862573D000153454?OpenDocument

St. Louis County residents need a more representative government

From the Post Dispatch, Wednesday, December 19, 2007. Guest Commentary

St. Louis County residents need a more representative government
By Greg Bailey
=================================

The controversy over St. Louis County's plan to overhaul trash collection is only the latest symptom of citizen discontent with county government. For thousands of people in unincorporated St. Louis County, the county government is their only local government. For many more thousands living in municipalities, the impersonal county government institutions in Clayton can render their local governments powerless. It is not surprising that there is a grassroots effort, particularly among some people, to divide St. Louis County into smaller county jurisdictions and even some talk about recalling County Executive Charlie Dooley.

As well-intentioned as these somewhat longshot efforts might be, they miss the point. The problem is not the size of the county or any one person but the structure of the government. The goal should be to make government institutions directly accountable to the citizens they're supposed to serve.

St. Louis County is the largest and most powerful entity in Missouri. With more than a million people, it is larger than several states and roughly equal to the population of South Dakota and Vermont combined. The county government is responsible for many government services for all county residents, and the large minority of the population living in unincorporated area depend on the county for all their government services. St. Louis County has pockets of great wealth that rival Beverly Hills and pockets of poverty as dismal as any in the United States.

Since 1968, the government authority of this mass of people and land has been concentrated in one county executive, one prosecutor and seven part-time council members. All other offices that typically are accountable to voters "assessor, recorder of deeds, county clerk and others" are appointed, rather than elected, which puts the officeholders beyond the reach of the public.

It is time to question the wisdom of this structure. County residents vividly remember the so-called "drive-by" assessments of properties several years ago, which resulted in larger tax bills for many. Would any assessor who had to answer to the voters every four years even have attempted this? Making these officeholders directly elected would make them directly accountable.

Certainly St. Louis County does some things well. This includes the work of the county police department and the administration of the parks system - although both could be better funded. But other parts of the government do not measure up.

Of course, there are many fine, dedicated public servants working in county government who do their best for the people under difficult circumstances, but any government unit that does not have to answer to the public is liable to misuse or even abuse its authority. Most people, for example, have little direct contact with the circuit clerk's office in Clayton. They are fortunate. The poor service and hostile attitudes I encounter there are a direct result of a lack of accountability.

In its existing configuration, the office of the county executive operates more like a monarchy than a center of policy-making. Concentrating so much power in one person is a mistake. For proof, one only need look at the recent public meetings on the trash plan at which citizens were forbidden to speak or question the county officials presenting the plan it intends to impose.

The problems are compounded by the concentration of county legislative power in a seven-person council, an absurdly small number to represent more than a million people. At the very least the number of council members should be doubled perhaps tripled — creating smaller districts whose representatives would be closer to the neighborhoods they represent and, thus, more accountable. Only by increasing the number of districts, shrinking their geographic size and heightening accountability can the council become a true counterbalance to the power of the executive.

At best, democracy is a messy and contentious enterprise. But it would be better to have a crowded ballot and noisy competition than the present system of remote officials exercising power without real accountability. It is time for county citizens to shift their anger from trash hauling and other issues to a debate about overhauling county government.

- - - - - - -
Greg Bailey, a writer and a lawyer in private practice, lives and works in Oakville in unincorporated south St. Louis County. In November 2000, he was the unsuccessful Democratic candidate for state Senate from the First District.

Citizens Against Trashy Government To Fight For Open Government & Consent of The Governed In Country Trash Policy

Denouncing secrecy and arrogant decision-making by the St. Louis County Government on two major issues involving trash, some county citizens have organized "Citizens Against Trashy Government" to fight back.

The targets of the group are two recent decisions of the county on trash policy:

1. A new plan for trash districts having one hauler imposed on each of 8 large districts countywide, and . . .

2. The secret settlement made by the county attorney to block any challenge to a giant trash collection site in South County when the county had previously held the proposal to be "a menace to public health."

Co-Chairs, Tom Diehl and Mike Becker stated: "When it comes to trash policy, the county government is starting to look like an old-time, big city machine. It is trying to impose a monopoly trash system countywide that the citizens don't want to squeeze out competition and give the controlling politicians a patronage windfall.

The result will inevitably be higher prices for trash service to everyone through fewer competitors and higher taxes for all county taxpayers. At a time when the county government is talking about tax increases, they are planning to spend $400,000 in the first year alone on a program that is about as well organized as lifeboat drills on the Titanic."

Regarding the settlement of the Weber trash collection site lawsuit, they stated: "It is an incredible violation of the sunshine law for the county attorney to settle a case in favor of the Weber trash site without public disclosure and without consultation or consent from her client, the County Council, which has previously voted 7-0 on a bipartisan basis to reject a trash dump at that site."

Citizens Against Trashy Government proposes to fight for two key principles of which they believe the county government is in danger of losing:

1. Consent of the governed

2. Open government

Regarding "Consent of The Governed", co-chair Diehl stated: "The clumsy monopoly trash district plan with the county is trying to impose does not arise from any public demand for the idea. It is a political power play to create monopoly franchises for favored insiders. This plan stomps on consent of the people and forces ordinary citizens to give up price and service competition countywide in favor of a government imposed monopoly."

"We recognize that many municipalities and subdivisions have only a single trash hauler, but that is their free choice where there is still competition available if they aren't happy."

"This county plan to crush competition i favor of trash monopoly districts belongs in the dumpster."

Regarding the settlement of the Weber lawsuit for a trash dump in South County, co-chair Becker stated: The County Health Department and the County Council had both found the imposition of the Weber trash dump at the South County site to be an undesirable nuisance. Now the County attorney has settled the lawsuit closing out the power of the County to appeal an adverse court decision without consent or notice to her client, the County Council, and without public disclosure of the settlement in clear violation of the sunshine law."

"If this decision is allowed to stand, it will be a total victory for secret, back-room deals over open government. No government lawyer has the power through a secret deal to overturn government policy reached through public hearings and open votes."

To launch their effort, the Citizens Against Trashy Government will hold a rally on Tuesday, December 11, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Holiday Inn at Lindbergh and Highway 55. They ask the public to turn out to form a base of volunteer and financial support to fight for restoration of consent of the govern and open government in St. Louis County government.

Tom Diehl is a fund-raising consultant who was involved in the fight against the Weber trash dump and was unsuccessfully sued by Weber in a $5 million defamation suit to halt criticism.

Mike Becker is a real estate rehaber who had assisted in the successful fight by Diehl and the John Doe Society against the Weber defamation suit. Diehl is a Democrat, and Becker is a Republican. They intend the organization to seek bi-partisan support from all citizens concerned about the future of the county.

For further information, contact:

Jerry Wamser
105 Concord Plaza, Suite 209
St. Louis, MO 63128
PHONE: (314) 729-0272
FAX: (314) 729-7474
E-MAIL: WAMSLAW @ YAHOO.COM