Bay City commission debates $3 monthly sanitation increase and whether to cut recycling or privatize trash services

The Bay City Commission spent substantial time weighing a proposed $3 monthly raise to residential sanitation fees, options to cut costs and potential service impacts. George Martini presented the sanitation fund overview and said expenses are projected to increase about 16%; the proposed $3 per‑bin monthly hike (from $18.55 to $21.55) would generate about $591,300 but would not entirely eliminate the need to use fund balance.

Martini outlined mitigation scenarios. Eliminating curbside recycling would remove roughly two sanitation positions, one vehicle and certain hauling and tipping costs; staff estimated a net savings of about $439,000 annually (about $2.22 per bin per month). However, Martini said the city would forfeit a state grant of about $381,000 tied to recycling equipment and also risk shifting those materials to landfill disposal and increased hauling/tipping fees. Recycling staff/advocates told commissioners Bay City enjoys high participation (about 90% of households) and operates a recycling center that serves Bay County; they warned loss of recycling could double refuse tonnage and remove the city’s voice on county waste planning.

Privatization was discussed as another option. Martini said contracting out sanitation could reduce costs depending on the service package, but cautioned that outsourced providers often reduce service levels (for example, stricter brush rules), and the city would likely lose a pool of CDL‑licensed drivers who currently support snow removal and other cross‑department functions. Commissioners expressed strong concern for potential job losses, reduced service quality and the city’s ability to respond to storms and resident complaints if services were outsourced.

Several commissioners, including Tenney and Zanotti, said they were reluctant to privatize and signaled a preference for retaining recycling even if it means a modest rate increase. Commissioner Cubitt repeatedly asked staff for more detail on alternatives and equitable measures, noting that flat per‑household increases disproportionately affect low‑income residents; commissioners suggested exploring targeted assistance or community partnerships to soften impacts. A planning step was suggested to return with additional analysis and with a public survey and outreach; staff offered to present again at the next budget meeting with more detail on smoothing increases and other options.

Public commenter Dustin Kosick urged the commission not to privatize sanitation and warned that repeated utility and fee increases put severe pressure on residents living paycheck to paycheck. Recycling staff emphasized local environmental and economic benefits of recycling programs and county-level commitments that could be undermined by service cuts.

The commission did not vote on the sanitation fee or on privatization at this meeting; several commissioners indicated they favored further study and public engagement before taking final action.