Trash Fee or Override?

I know most people would answer the above with "neither," but humor me here.

The initial trash fee plan would probably cost me about $200 a year. The annual fee alone would cost $100. I figure at the $1.50 per bag, I'm good for about $100 a year. If the city passed an override, according to FY08 figures, every $1 million in override money would cost the average homeowner $74 a year.

I know we're talking shades of less horrible here, but I'd argue that an override would cost less than a trash fee. While it still seems unlikely an override would pass, I think it's really unlikely that voters would approve more than $1 million in new spending. Geez, it could $2 million and I'd still probably be saving money.

That said, the trash fee has a better chance of getting done than override. While the council might still be considering a trash fee, I see no circumstance where a majority of the council would support an override effort. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if not one councilor supported an override effort.

I know, I know. Most people say cut, don't spend more. But the fundamental fact is that revenues won't keep up with new, basic costs like energy, personnel and insurance. It just won't. So you just keep cutting year after year, or you do something. If the city can get new growth moving, this becomes a smaller issue, but when will new growth significantly help the city? I'd say not in the next few years. Five years? 10 years? What do you do in the meantime? People don't like seeing the library cut to part-time and don't like to see police officers and firefighters laid off, but until something changes, those kind of things will be an annual fact of life.

So, even though the final answer will be "nothing," I think it's an interesting question. What would people rather have -- a cheaper override, or a more costly trash fee? When you forget the politics and the knee-jerk reaction to the term "override," it might be the better option for your wallet. And the way this override discussion is likely to be focused -- a series of questions targeting specific departments and expenditures -- it would give voters the opporunity to target that new spending the way they wanted.

Eh, there's my Friday ramble. Time to tell me I'm an idiot and that we should just keep cutting.