Bountiful Recycling and RAP Tax

Due to limited time, I’m consolidating two posts into one:


I recycle the vast majority of my waste. I do so, without burdening others, by using the centrally located recycling ‘depots’ located in several locations in south Davis County. The depots accept all sorts of different materials (including paper/cardboard), but I also save my paper goods and put them in the Food Pantry recycling bin as it provides the pantry some additional funding.

I have found the depots entirely convenient as they are located along main roads which the vast majority, if not, all of us use at some time during the week. I would find it repugnant to force others to pay for my convenience and my interest. Yet, that is exactly what Mr. Ward desires and the Bountiful City Council is considering.

The proponent(s) seem to believe that charging you, the old lady on a fixed income, and the rest of your neighborhood $50/year extra for their convenience. The fee only further adds to all the recent tax and fee increases, those on fixed/low etc incomes must shoulder. According to Mr. Ward, the current system, which literally takes me about 2 minutes a week to use, is just too tasking.

Finally, while I do recycle, I also don’t delude myself with the thought that I am saving the earth (see this detailed NYT article). While recycling aluminum seems pretty clear cut (and is heavily market driven), the value of recycling the rest of the materials has issues. Paper, likely doesn’t save much forest land as tree farmers typically plant more than they harvest and many recycling processes release and/or use toxic chemicals etc. Further, I’ve been told that the recyclables are the best fuel for the Davis County burn plant. Ultimately, I’m willing to accept that my recycling efforts likely end up in no/negligible positive environmental impact.

One last note, the proponent(s) scored a big coup by getting the city council to put a survey in the Bountiful City newsletter. Obviously such a survey is anything but scientific and proponents will be the most likely to turn it in. With a virtually guaranteed outcome, the city council can claim overwhelming support for the measure and shove another special interest project and monetary burden down citizens throats.


Despite the RAP Tax failing in key revenue generating cities such as West Bountiful and Woods Cross, Bountiful and Centerville will continue with the special interest tax and try to slap together some sort of facility. Take heed Woods Cross and West Bountiful (and North Salt Lake) residents: I would also expect to see the RAP Tax shoved on the ballot in the coming years.

Again, I think it is a shame that people force everyone else to pay for their personal hobbies. Further, government getting into things it doesn’t belong in is a Pandora’s box. One day, a RAP/RAMP etc Tax city will find the Lesbian Theater Company or artist of the ‘Madonna in Dung’ or Hate Hillary Clinton  Dance Company legitimately demanding funding. Then what? Say hello to the ACLU.

I attempted to look at the donors to the Rap Tax campaign and was unable to find a list. In the past, I understand that Jason Burningham with the bonding company of Lewis, Young, Robertson, and Burningham played a part in the promoting the RAP Tax (see here and here for example). The reason that is interesting is this is the same firm that promoted the South Davis Rec Center (and SD Metro Fire) and ended up getting a no bid contract to manage the bonding for the facility. I would love to know how much involvement (including monetarily) the firm had in the RAP tax initiative and if they will get another no bid contract for the bond on the theater complex.

Last, a lingering question remains on the accountability. As noted in a previous post on this matter, there appear to be no other projects for funding, leaving the money firmly in the hands of council members and their friends to fund whatever pet projects they see fit.


7 thoughts on “Bountiful Recycling and RAP Tax

  1. You must recycle at a different place than I do. There is only one “depot” provided by Bountiful city, which is constantly overflowing whenever I go there. It is also out of the way for me since I live at the south end of Davis Blvd, taking a lot more than 2 minutes to pack up my recycling, find a place to park, find a place to stuff in the recycling into the overflowed containers, and then get smells out of my car. Also, this program is by no means settled; the program could be voluntary. Also, I don’t believe anyone is required by law to even use any of the city’s refuse containers.
    Finally, I am fine with getting rid of the burn plant. I think it’s disgusting we support a cancer-causing pollution machine. I would like to see it shut down and recycling is step toward that. Finally, if you are so concerned, go to the council meeting where it is discussed and talk about it. The meeting I went to was packed with recycling supporters, but I bet you were just as free to get on the agenda as anyone else.
    Also, while I did vote against the RAP tax, please don’t feel you need to denigrate entire groups of people in order to prove your point. I can agree or disagree with you without homophobic ad hominems.

  2. I guess I am more organized than you, my stuff is already sorted at home as we throw it away and have never had a problem pulling up and tossing stuff in at the Bountiful (or NSL etc) areas. I’ve never had the recycling smell up my car…I rinse out the milk jugs…not sure where the smell would come from.

    The program may be voluntary, but the fee won’t be. That’s the point.

    The burn plant won’t be going anywhere until it is paid off.

    In terms of council meetings where this is discussed, I had commitments that took priority and ended up sending a letter. Sorry, due to my schedule, it is rare that I can attend the meetings and usually have to use the mail.

    Next, I didn’t denigrate anyone as you attempt to imply. Show me where I used an ad hominem attack. The point of listing the lesbian/conservative hate Hillary groups is that the community and councils would be opposed to provide funding to them. So you end up with a bad situation with possible litigation and political/PR mess which was not necessary if it would be left in the hands of private individuals pursuing their interests.

  3. […] I have a lack of sympathy for those who supported such government projects and are unhappy with the event.  This simply demonstrates why such projects/facilities should be left to the private sector.  A private firm would have the freedom to accept or reject the event at this point, it is much more difficult and emotional to do so with a publicly run facility.  Obviously, this won’t be the last time a tax funded project ends up in controversy – remember, we also have RAP tax funds various groups will have access to. […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s