Collectivist Mayor Rick Kriseman and Council: Let the “Struggling, Vulnerable and Voiceless” Pay Higher Garbage Bills for Our Elitist Shared Recycling Vision.

The "Strugging, vulnerable and voices" will soon be paying for the recycling "shared vision" of the collectivists in charge at St. Pete City Hall.

The “struggling, vulnerable and voiceless” will soon be paying for the recycling “shared vision” of the collectivists in charge at St. Pete City Hall.

Citizens of St. Petersburg should be prepared for higher garbage bills in the future. That includes the poor and others that collectivist  Mayor Rick Kriseman and the St. Pete City Council often claim to want to help.  The “progressive” dream of mandatory recycling for all city residents is about to be realized.  This week, the Sun Beam Times will be evaluating the bloated sanitation budget and revealing how garbage bills are already artificially high and will increase more with mandatory recycling. At his inaugural address, St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman offered this glowing utopian vision for St. Petersburg:

“When it comes to our government, we need a shared vision that serves as a common goal – the vision of an innovative, competitive, forward thinking community that embraces the 21st century. Result will be a better quality of life for those living well and access to an improved quality of life for those who are struggling, vulnerable or voiceless.”

The Mayor is about to sock it to the “struggling, vulnerable and voiceless” by continuing higher garbage bills for them and forcing them to recycle.  He and his new hard core leftists on City Council (Amy Foster and Darden Rice) will join the rest of the leftist Council to enact a mandatory recycling plan. That means each household will be given a rolling green or blue recycling can.  They will be told to “choose” to put recyclable material into it. At some point, they will be told that they will only enjoy once per week garbage pickup since “recycling” is available (try that in hot summertime St. Pete!).  They will then be told that there garbage bills will remain high or will go up to pay for it.

So, if you are one of the “struggling, vulnerable and voiceless”, congratulations, you are part of the new “shared vision” for the common goal – the common goal of the elitists in charge of our government. That means the struggling – the poor, the single mother, the unemployed, the family man who just lost a job or the recent college grad – will be told to pay more to do more work at home and get less service.   If you are one of the vulnerable – kids whose mom must serve more Mac and Cheese to pay the higher garbage bill, elderly on a fixed income, disabled suffering with pain – pay for the shared vision of the elitist.  If you are one of the voiceless – those who disagree, or those who simply don’t want to recycle – the government of the shared vision would prefer you remain silent.

Welcome to the Rick Kriseman’s, Amy Foster’s and Darden Rice’s “Journey to our Collective Vision” the Mayor also described in his inaugural address. Enjoy the ride and get out your wallets and your work clothes.



6 Replies:

  1. Glenn

    The increase will not be major. There are programs and assistance for those who cannot afford to pay – that will not change. Recycling ONLY works if it is mandatory, achieving 80% participation in communities where it is required. The so-called voluntary solution doesn’t work. This is a positive step, one our prior mayor didn’t have the courage to implement. We don’t need to discuss the benefits of recycling here, as I assume everyone is aware enough on that front. I support the move towards mandatory recycling and have been making that statement ever since moving to St. Pete.

    1. Sun Beam Times Post author

      Thanks Glen,
      Thanks for admitting it will cost more although you claim it is “not major”. You will see in subsequent posts that there is room for about a 5-10% cut in current sanitation bills. Now the poor are facing an increase instead.

      You state it only “works” if it is mandatory. What does “work” mean? to accomplish what goal? To achieve what good for those who are recycling? How does it benefit the single mom who must pay a higher garbage bill and feed 3 kids at the same time? All while she must have once/week garbage pickup and forced to sort out the recycling? What is that accomplishing?

      Yes, let’s have the discussion on the benefits of recycling. What are they in your opinion?

  2. Al

    the quality of lif in a community should not be reduced to solely the economic “cost” of living in a community. to take your logic to its extreme and to call Krisemen and RIce collectivists, and at the same time imply that imrovements to the city should be shouldered by the more well off, since they shouldn’t be taken on by “struggling, vulnerable and voiceless” is disingenious.

    let me also address your invitation to Glen to have a discussion on the benefits of recycling. while you can debate the fiscal cost of a mandatory program, i invite you to consider the non-monetary costs. I grew up here in the city and if you have been here any length of time, i invite you to remember how bad Tampa Bay had become. Ask anyone who fishes or does anything on the water, and they can tell you how wonerful it is to have a clean tampa bay. Efforts such as recyclying improve our quality of life in countless ways including cleaning up our valuable ecosystem and reducing the wate we generate. i know tht doesn’t come free and i am willing to pay the price. BTW, if you ask that mother of 3 kids if she is willingto pay a littel more for a cleaner and more wholesome St Pete for her kids, i think you might be surprised at her answer.

    thanks for listening

    1. Sun Beam Times Post author

      THank you Al,
      Well, I too have been here nearly all my life. I remember the bad old Bay. You know why it was so dirty? Dumping of sewage from LOCAL GOVERNMENTS into the bay. Took legislative action to stop that and “voila”: reclaimed water.

      Now, how has the bay become so much better without mandatory recycling? If we are making great progress without mandatory recycling, why mandate it now?
      Saying we recycle is not the same as saying we stop littering. In fact, we will have less “clean” electricity by having less garbage to burn in our garbage-electric plant in Mid Pinellas if we divert large quatities to recycling. Recycling itself has its own environmental negative impact…garbage trucks to haul, plants to process, more raw materials to supplement the recycleds.

      I would LOVE to see a poll of poor single mom’s to see if they want to pay extra so the rich environmentalists can fee good about recycling. I know what the answer would be – NO!

      Now, I DO recycle. But it is a choice that I pay extra for. I don’t choose to FORCE others to do it however.

  3. Tom Kulaga

    In an area such as ours, who is to say who does the littering? Is it the tourists or the locals?

  4. Dorine McKinnon

    What was not mentioned in this article is that Pinellas County already recycles the garbage and incinerates it which in turn provides electricity for residents… even to the point of recycling the ashes So what I would like to know is whether this new plan is just a feel good waste of time and money for residents since their garbage is going to the incinerator anyway?

Comments are closed.