Let’s talk trash! Trash cans that is as you might have noticed over the past 4-5 years the number of trash cans on the streets has diminished and the streets have gotten dirtier.
Why is that?
San Francisco's quest for the perfect trash can has become a prolonged and costly endeavor. Starting in 2018, Matt Haney led the charge to change that. The city opted to design custom trash cans rather than use existing models, leading to the development of prototypes costing between $12,000 to $20,000 each. Initially estimated to cost $427,500 for prototype production, this process could ultimately result in each costing as much as $5,000, with the total expenditure ranging from $6.6 million to $16.5 million.
The city's Public Works department justified the decision based on aesthetic preferences and the unique requirements of San Francisco. These requirements included durability, tamper-proof features, and built-in sensors, which existing models reportedly did not fully meet.
The decision to pursue custom designs was made by former Public Works Director Mohammed Nuru, who was later arrested on federal corruption charges. This raises questions about the initial motivation and oversight of the project.
San Francisco's Board of Supervisors approved the expenditure despite these concerns, with only superficial scrutiny of alternative, cheaper models already in use in other cities.
So what did they do?
Supervisor Matt Haney announced the installation of 68 new "smart" trash cans known as Big Belly in San Francisco's Tenderloin neighborhood and other parts of the city.
The Cost?
“The cost of the Bigbelly varies by contract. The 20 cans paid for by the city and installed in the Castro and other neighborhoods cost $3,000 per bin per year to lease, with another $15,000 set aside to cover maintenance for all of them.
Union Square paid $317 per can for installation plus $200 per month per can to lease. Ongoing repairs and maintenance have cost less than $200 per year per can, said Robbie Silver, spokesman for the Union Square Business Improvement District.” (sfchronicle)
As anyone with eyes can see this boondongale of a plan hasn’t worked very well. Not only are the streets more expensive we’ve signed up for a terrible Trash cans as a service plan.
What we should have done was used that money for more frequent trash collections.
As Supervisor, I will work to terminate the big belly contract and bring back the original green cans or other cost-efficient off-the-shelf cans and ensure that collections are made a regular enough intervals so that they are not overflowing.
This is one of many examples of where the city government spends money without limiting principles or pragmatism. Had we wanted to replace these cans with something more bespoke. I would have put out an RFP (request for pricing) to designers and manufacturers all over the country with design requests and cost caps and awarded the contract based on the best design that met those requirements.
What do you think should be done about the trash can situation?
Comentários