NATCHEZ — With its new, expanded garbage and recycling program in the works, The City of Natchez could pay approximately $58,000 more in the coming 12 months than it did last year for garbage collection and disposal.

City officials have said they will not raise monthly rates for residents. That means the added cost for collection and disposal — which city leaders say is still within the city’s budget — will cut into money Natchez Public Works uses for debris and trash pick-up, mosquito control and similar purposes.

The city paid Waste Management approximately $853,500 of the budgeted $985,000 for collection and disposal services in the 2011-2012 fiscal year, according to City Clerk Donnie Holloway. The total factors in a tonnage rebate Waste Management gave back to the city in the budget.

The leftover $131,500 in last year’s budget was used by Public Works for debris and trash cleanup and mosquito control, City Engineer David Gardner said.

The city is currently negotiating collection, curbside recycling and disposal contracts with Waste Pro USA and Riverbend Environmental Services, respectively, which could total approximately $911,520 for the first year of the contract. A rebate offered by Riverbend, similar to one Waste Management gave the city in the past, could lower disposal costs.

The inclusion of a citywide recycling program, 18-gallon recycling bins and 65-gallon garbage cans for the city’s approximately 6,000 residents are the main reasons for the cost increase. Recycling would cost $1.70 per household for the first year and incrementally increase to $1.97 in the sixth year, if the contract is renewed by the city to that point.

But raising the annual cost of collection and disposal could apparently mean less money for Public Works to use for the various services it provides with that money.

“I think we can make it work,” Gardner said. ““I don’t anticipate it changing our services. We may have to be a little more creative to do what we do, but you strive to get more and more efficient every year.”

Cutting into the Public Works’ budget is not something Mayor Butch Brown said he considered beforehand.

“We did not explore the result in shortfall to departments, any departments, including Public Works,” Brown said. “The board felt strongly that they wanted to include cans and a full-scale recycling program into the contract, and the board voted for it, so that’s what we’re doing.

“I think the main message the public needs to know is that we’re not raising rates.”

Brown and Ward 1 Alderwoman Joyce Arceneaux-Mathis said they believe no cutbacks in Public Works services would be necessary.

“We’re still in the midst of our audit, and the books haven’t been balanced in several years,” Brown said. “The past (books) have not been a good set of numbers, and I’m smart enough to know the city is in relatively good shape, in part from the revenue of the new (Magnolia Bluffs) Casino.”

Brown and Arceneaux-Mathis also pointed out that the city’s new environmental court, which was set up in municipal court to hear litter, abandoned vehicles and other related cases, should net some profit for the city that will be put into the Public Works budget.

“We think the environmental court will pay for the operation of the court and generate enough revenue to have money to do some of the things Public Works will have to do,” Brown said. “The fines that will be collected will offset the costs, and more importantly we intend to contract services out (to cut costs).”

The Federal Emergency Management Agency will reimburse storm debris pickup costs, Arceneaux-Mathis said.

Ward 3 Alderwoman Sarah Smith said she had not planned for the decrease to Public Works money, but said she believes the city will be able to handle it.

“No, I had not planned for it because I had not planned for the (garbage) cans to be in there,” she said.

Ward 6 Alderman Dan Dillard suggested the addition of garbage cans to the city’s request for proposal. Dillard said he believes residents will appreciate the new cans.

By his calculations, Dillard said, new cans would cost the city $1.68 per household, meaning an annual cost of approximately $121,000 for the life of the contract.

“I do (think it’s worth it),” Dillard said. “I think it’ll tidy up the streets.”

Dillard has complained in the past about residents putting their trash bags out for pickup without first putting them in a can.

Waste Pro would also be liable for damages to cans during use by their company, Dillard said.

“So if their guys yank the handles off these, it’s their cans,” he said.

Dillard also pointed out that for the last couple of decades, he believes Natchez residents have been paying more than what they were getting for garbage collection.

The previous contract with Waste Management was based on the city having 7,325 households and producing approximately 8,000 tons of garbage each year.

Dillard said something dawned on him during the most recent request for proposals, which came after a judge nullified the contract awarded in November to Waste Pro.

Dillard said he presumed each resident receiving garbage service would also pay a water bill, since in the City of Natchez garbage fees are included on residents’ water bills.

When the city checked with Natchez Water Works, city leaders discovered the city had fewer households than in the older garbage contract. Water Works records indicate approximately 6,000 occupied households exist in the city.

Further research revealed that the city was only producing approximately 7,200 tons of garbage annually.

With the same $13.74 on their bill each month and expanded services, Dillard said residents are now getting more for their money.

Dillard also said he disputes that Public Works is allowed to use the extra money from garbage collection for anything other than just mosquito control.

“That’s money for collection on households, not for Public Works to go clean up after a storm or dispose of debris from demolition of a house,” he said.

Ward 4 Alderman Tony Fields said he believes Public Works may use the money for debris pickup, mosquito control and related services.

“I’ve always been under the impression that that money was supposed to be directed toward Public Works for those services,” he said.

Beyond all the variables included in the new garbage program, Smith said the increased cost of the contract is an up-front payment for a long-term investment. For example, she said, residents get new cans and recycling could eventually lower disposal costs.

“It will pay off in the long run,” she said.