Bulky-pickup bill needs modifying

Honolulu is among the most densely populated cities in the U.S., according to the Brookings Institution and others who study urban design. On the positive side, this characteristic supports the argument for mass transit here, but there’s a downside, too: Oahu residents have no room to store their excess belongings, which means a lot of them end up on the already congested sidewalks.

Bulky-item disposal has been a problem in this city for years, and a pilot project that proposes a new solution — pickup by appointment, for a fee — deserves some consideration, as long as it doesn’t displace the existing system.

The blight occurs primarily because in most areas the tax-supported municipal collection happens only once a month. The purge of unwanted items often precedes a move-out day for renters, and they may need to leave their cast-offs behind days or weeks before the scheduled pickup for their neighborhood.

Whatever the reason, piles of rubbish too large to fit in city-provided bins mount on sidewalks all over town, especially in the most densely developed parts of the city, such as McCully-Moiliili, Makiki and Salt Lake.

City Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi has introduced Bill 41, a measure that would institute a one-year pilot program for bulky waste. The problem with the bill as written is that it would replace the current system of monthly pickups for the duration.

The fee is unspecified, but Kobayashi said the aim is to keep it at a nominal level, one that could help offset some of the city’s costs rather than turn the service into a money-maker.

Since that’s the case, it would be far less disruptive, and more instructive, if the fee service would be offered as a value-added option, enabling residents to summon the trash trucks at a more convenient time than what the monthly calendar dictates.

At the end of the year, it should be possible to gauge whether residents are willing to pay a premium if the result is improved service, one that takes care of a problem at a time that is more efficient for the city and more convenient for the public.

But if they’re not willing, residents need the fallback option of the monthly pickup, or they may be even more inclined than they are now to dump their items someplace where they can’t be tagged for it.

This is only the latest strategy the city has considered. In 2010 the Council enacted an ordinance setting a fine of up to $250 for violations of the bulky-item regulations. The fat penalty was supposed to deter residents from hauling their waste to the curb too early.

City officials say that the costly fine has meant that few violators become repeat offenders, but that’s not a clear marker of success. Rulemaking took time and the law has only been enforced for a little more than a year, resulting in 264 notices of violations. However, only 24 orders actually assessing the fines were issued, resulting in collections totalling $6,000.

This penalty seems insufficient to the task of reducing curbside waste, and the city certainly could use another tool in its toolkit. Bill 41 has not yet hit on the ideal formula for an alternative service, but the conversation has only begun, with the measure referred to the Council’s public-works panel for further discussion later this month.

There should be a way to test an alternative means of coping with an urban problem without creating too much sticker shock for the public. Honolulu’s density is certain to increase in coming years, but there’s no reason why its residents should have to simply endure a mounting mess on the sidewalks.