Doubling garbage collection fees in Jacksonville is about as popular as ants at a church picnic.

One business owner outlined his views on the subject in a letter to members of the City Council. Joseph F. Marmo said:

“As a small (mom and pop) business owner of a rental property business with several single-family dwellings, it is without question usurious to increase rates for solid waste by this percentage.  It goes without saying that inflation, cost of living, and all the other expenses one incurs to survive in this high cost environment have gone up higher than real wages.  ‘Don’t California my Florida’ should be the new catch phrase, as Florida has become a high-cost State.  

“My lifelong toil to build a company, all for the government to extract the deeds of my labor is criminal.  (Property tax is another discussion.)

“What is our government doing to counter this awful increase in the cost of living for its Citizens?  They RAISE property taxes, they RAISE fees, they are making it impossible for the average Duval County Resident to survive. This increase is an abhorrent example of a bloated, incompetent, and out of control local government.  Who thought it was a good decision for this massive increase?  Did you not expect blowback?

“I implore you to retract this increase, open this up to competitive bids and bring this surcharge back down to a normal operating level.   Maybe take a cue from our great President Donald J. Trump and make a deal with your vendor – let them know you will move the service to a competitor.  Get creative.

“This increase is unacceptable and cannot stand.  Stand up for your constituents.  We reject this proposal.”  

Councilman Matt Carlucci led the effort to raise taxes, claiming that the solid waste function was going into debt because it was being subsidized by a loan from the general fund.

Property owners pay a direct fee for waste collection, but the charge has not been raised in 15 years and has become less than the cost.

The annual fee is set to more than double over a three-year period. The current fee of $151.80 will increase to $324 on the 2025 property tax bill, then rise to $354 in 2026 and $384 in 2027.

Without the increase, the city’s solid waste fund subsidy was projected to reach $500 million by 2031.

The decision to raise the fee was made by a 12-7 vote by the council. The council also approved a “safety net” program, meaning that other taxpayers will pay more to lower the bills for low-income households.

One lame argument was made by proponents who said Jacksonville’s garbage fees were significantly lower than those in other comparable cities, such as Tampa and Orlando.

By what stretch of logic does a politician argue that other cities are charging more for services, therefore we must raise ours to match?

Any sensible politician would boast that we are saving our taxpayers money by providing the same service at a lower cost. But some Jacksonville politicians think differently than normal people.

The problem with all the deficit and debt argument is that city taxpayers are borrowing from themselves. They pay the property taxes that go into the general fund which has been lending money to the solid waste fund.

Eye on Jacksonville has not heard a single proposal to lower the property tax rate an amount equal to the new revenue. Or to simply “forgive” the loan.

Maybe Carlucci will make a proposal. But don’t bet on it.

What he and others want to do is collect a half-billion dollars in new revenue.

Why?

Well, there is the Community Benefits Agreement related to the Jaguars Agreement which is a cost of over $20 million next year.

Then, there is the increase in Police and Fire Pension Fund costs of $23 million next year. Additionally, there are significant costs related to collective bargaining agreements that loom on the horizon in fiscal year 2027.

As for the loan, the new fees won’t pay it back. The city is using a clever gimmick. Because the fee can only cover the cost of current collections, they will be using the solid waste franchise fee that commercial haulers pay for utilizing city roadways as the mechanism to pay down the debt back to the general fund. It is all very legal; the franchise fee can be utilized for any public purpose.

City officials could – and probably would — argue that the solid waste fee increase could help mitigate an increase in the property tax rate.

But they can’t argue with the fact that they are responsible for the higher taxes. They decided a new stadium was needed. They made collective bargaining agreements. They spend money on frivolity such as the Emerald Trail, and dubious projects such as septic tank replacement.

You can’t create a need for revenue and then claim you are helpless and must raise the taxes to meet that need.