Evanston staff propose year-round yard/food-waste opt-out, higher cart fees and new bulk-pickup charge to address solid-waste deficit

City solid-waste staff told the council on Nov. 3 that the solid-waste enterprise fund has operated with a structural deficit since the fund—s 2011 inception and has required subsidies averaging about $1 million a year. Brian Zimmerman, the city—s solid-waste coordinator, presented a package of service and fee changes aimed at closing that deficit and promoting diversion of organics.

Key proposals and rationale Brian Zimmerman said the city planned to switch food-and-yard-waste collection from a seasonal add-on to a year-round opt-out program to increase organic diversion. To do that, staff proposed moving to a monthly fee structure and recommended a $7 per month charge for the service. He also proposed that retail vendors issue yard-waste stickers at $2.50 (rather than the city doing distribution) to streamline operations.

For bulky-item service, staff proposed replacing the current twice-yearly free bulk pickup and $100 special-pickup model with a $1 per unit per month fee for both single-family and condominium programs; residents could still schedule special pickups through the city—s 311 system, but the monthly per-unit fee would cover year-round needs. Zimmerman said the city would not set a fixed annual limit on scheduled bulk pickups but would monitor usage and adjust if demand exceeded capacity.

Cart sizing and pricing Staff proposed a new 35-gallon trash-cart option to supplement diversion incentives and to keep a price differential that rewards smaller carts. The proposed pricing in staff slides set the 65-gallon cart at $14 per month and positioned the 35-gallon cart at the existing 65-gallon price to preserve the incentive to choose smaller containers.

Equity and council concerns Council members raised equity concerns about shifting more costs to fees, which they said can be more regressive than property taxes, and asked the city to address condominium billing disparities. "Condominiums are being charged more for the same amount of waste removal," Council member Rogers said, asking staff to explore tiering or alternative billing that accounts for building size and coordination challenges. Several members asked for a clearer index showing which services the city subsidizes and why.

Operational constraints Staff said portions of the fund—s cost base (weekly truck collection, transfer-station tonnage commitments) are relatively fixed and explained that recent contract proposals returned largely flat-rate pricing from haulers, limiting the city—s options to adopt a widely varying tiered rate model at this time. The city also said it would remove purchase barriers for new participants by eliminating initial cart-purchase fees.

Next steps The solid-waste proposals were presented for council discussion; staff said any final fee changes would be brought forward in the budget ordinance process. Council members asked staff to provide additional modeling on condo billing, regressivity impacts, and anticipated use levels for the new bulk-pickup monthly fee.