Sticker Program Reduces Traffic But Highlights Waste Management Challenges
Surry County’s decision to implement a sticker program aimed at limiting access to its recycling convenience centers has proven effective, according to Public Works Director Jessica Montgomery. During the recent budget planning retreat, she stated, "We implemented the sticker program a couple of years back. We feel it’s been a success. It has been a little bit of heartache educating folks, but we are down at the centers on average about 7% vehicles, so we have clearly made sure the Surry County citizens are using the centers only." This initiative, set up to inhibit non-county residents from utilizing these facilities, has successfully reduced traffic volume.
While the sticker program may have curbed the inflow of vehicles to the 13 recycling centers across the county, it has not led to a corresponding decrease in the waste sent to the landfill. Montgomery noted, "If we look at tonnage we’re actually not down, tonnage is up, so I don’t know what this really means but tonnage is going up across the whole country." Last year, Surry County sent 70,000 tons of waste to the landfill, comprising 44,000 tons of paid waste. Montgomery elaborated, mentioning, "Most of them are not recyclable," hinting at the challenges of modern consumerism where disposable items dominate.
This situation raises both practical and environmental concerns. Chair Mark Marion added poignantly, "Nothing is made like it used to." He emphasized the importance of addressing how much non-recyclable trash continues to enter the landfill. The principal issue at hand, as expressed by Montgomery, is accessibility to the recycling centers, particularly for those who own land without any structural developments. "We did it just for folks who pay the landfill fee. So, if you have vacant property or storage buildings on your property, you don’t pay the landfill fee," she explained.
The board learned at the retreat about numerous property owners—especially farmers—generally lacking means to dispose of the waste they generate. Montgomery reported calls from frustrated landowners denied stickers when they arrived at the centers with payloads of trash. Those without stickers are currently turned away, with the policy having hardened since the initial grace period following the program’s birth.
The commissioners acknowledged risks associated with turning away individuals presenting trash, pointing out potential littering consequences from frustrated citizens turned away at the centers without means to dispose of their waste. This situation presents the board with significant choices moving forward. Potential adjustments include maintaining the existing system, allowing case-by-case sticker purchases for $50, or universally imposing the landfill fee on all properties regardless of occupancy.
Tax Administrator Penny Harrison provided the board with data on vacant properties, stating there are 15,558 such sites across the county. This figure, paired with historical practices where others had previously received stickers without necessarily meeting the criteria, demonstrates the need for reform. Harrison stated, "I don’t know how many of those have storage buildings, RVs, barns, but we’ve had at least 20 folks come to the landfill wanting a sticker I could not give them because they do not pay the landfill fee." Her comments point to the gaps within the current system, which limit access for those inadvertently excluded.
Notably different approaches have emerged across counties with varying trash fee structures. For example, Wilkes County employs a “pay as you throw” system, which charges residents by the bag. Montgomery stated, “That is why if you look at the numbers around Elkin and Mountain Park, we had a huge drop in traffic at those centers because people were using Surry County because we made it easy to throw the trash away.” This highlights the lack of consistency and equity across regional pricing models for waste management.
Discussions led by Commissioner Van Tucker have aimed at rectifying these disparities, with his recommendation for case-by-case sticker pricing gaining traction. “It would be modest change. If they’re willing to pay the $50 landfill fee, they should have the ability to dump occasionally,” Tucker asserted.
While such changes could open more equitable access to the waste disposal systems for numerous citizens, Commissioner Eddie Harris cautioned, "There are some people who probably would use it as a pretext to just bring everything they got." Tucker countered with realism, acknowledging the potential for misuse but recognizing it as part and parcel of any regulatory refinement: "Every time you make a rule or ordinance change you may run the risk of it being abused.”
The board responded positively to the notion of ensuring fair accessibility without penalizing all property owners equally, particularly when many could be fully vacant. The measure permitting variable access based on case review received approval to facilitate this justice for many landowners.
Following these discussions, ideas to streamline the sticker acquisition process arose, with suggestions centering around allowing sticker purchases directly at the Tax Office, alongside immediate receipt, rather than relying on mail communications.
The Surry County Board of Commissioners looks poised to engage actively with this popular matter, potentially revisiting and refining the program as needed. These steps will likely have lasting impacts, helping the county balance effective waste management with equitable access for property owners within its jurisdiction. The board’s deliberations shine light on modern concepts of responsible waste handling tied intimately with civic needs, laying the groundwork for continued progress.