Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Litter Cleanup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Volunteer group asks city to pilot funded litter pickups; estimates $7,200 per ward
Summary
Trash for Trees founder Aaron Dohan told the Public Infrastructure and Utilities Committee his volunteer group has collected hundreds of thousands of pieces of litter and proposes a pilot that would cost about $7,200 to fund weekly pickups in one ward; he suggested partnerships with refuse routes, community groups and a modest household fee as funding options.
Aaron Dohan, founder and director of the volunteer group Trash for Trees, briefed the Public Infrastructure and Utilities Committee on July 8 about five years of neighborhood litter‑cleanup work and proposed modest, pilot funding to scale pickup efforts.
Dohan said Trash for Trees has worked in 14 St. Louis neighborhoods since 2022 and described recent‑year output of about 480 volunteer hours, roughly 214 volunteers and roughly 176,000 pieces of litter collected in the past year (about 366 pieces per hour). "At $15 an hour, it costs about $7,200" to field crews that collect roughly 560 bags of litter in a single ward over a year, Dohan told the committee, adding that the figure does not capture every expense and is likely a conservative starting point.
Dohan detailed operational lessons: concentrate crews in one ward to make visible progress, focus on alleys and school zones, deploy small teams so heavy items can be handled, and keep photographic before/after evidence for public reporting. He described a recurring partnership with the Bounce Back Project, which supplied paid clean‑crew labor for some events and helped find workers; Dohan said some crew participants are unhoused or temporarily housed and that paying participants (about $13/hour in his example) provides both capacity and individual supports.
Committee members pressed for operational clarity. Alderman Clark Hubbard asked whether the crew members supplied through partners were unhoused; Dohan said "I do know some — one person is unhoused" and that some team members had temporary housing. Alderwoman Schweitzer asked whether U‑Haul and dump fees were included; Dohan said they were not always included and described the $7,200 figure as a lowball estimate that would rise when full logistics are included. Dohan also said he had sometimes coordinated ad hoc with city refuse trucks to offload large items and that he had discussed route timing with the deputy refuse commissioner, Randy Breitenfeld, to improve pickup efficiency.
Dohan suggested several funding models for a pilot: use ward capital funds (he noted $7,200 is a small fraction of a ward‑capital budget), create an optional $1 per household beautification fee, or pursue public–private partnerships with local realtors and nonprofits. He cited national Keep America Beautiful statistics to show broad public support for litter reduction and urged testing a single‑ward pilot before scaling citywide.
Committee members offered support and local sponsorship help; several said they could champion pilots in their wards and help connect Dohan with refuse staff and grant opportunities. Dohan closed by offering continued technical assistance to any pilot the city pursues.
Next steps: the presentation generated committee interest and several members offered to explore pilot options with Dohan and city refuse staff; no formal committee action was taken during the meeting.
