PAYT/SAYT PROS, CONS, TOPICS AND HOW IT CAN WORK PAYT ...€¦ · Goals/metrics, $, PAYT Lynchpin...

Skumatz, 303/494-1178, [email protected] 1

1

Incentive-based strategies for increasing recycling & program cost-effectiveness

Montgomery County MD WebinarFebruary 2019

Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph.D.Skumatz Economic Research

Associates, Inc. (SERA)

[email protected]© SERA2019, All Rights reserved

May be used with permission of author

PAYT/SAYT – PROS, CONS, AND HOW IT CAN WORK

SERA

TOPICS

PAYT Basics

PAYT Nitty Gritty

What Else Might Montgomery County Consider to Reach Goals?

Wrap-up and Questions

Terminology: Embedded

SERA

PAYT BASICS

SERA

PROGRAM EVOLUTION

Drop-offs, voluntary added fee recycling, education

Embedded recycling, MF and commercial ed. / assistance, expanded D/O

PAYT with embedded rates, yard waste, commercial programs , continued education

Add Res Food scraps, mandates / bans, address MF recycling, hauler incentives, PAYT+

Every-other-week MSW, mandatory commercial and MF, EPR, URO, zero waste

4

20- 45%

40% +

0 - 15% Diversion

10 – 25%

50% +

Education

Crosses

All Levels

Source: Skumatz Economic Research Associates, all rights reserved

mailto:[email protected]


5

WHAT IS PAY AS YOU THROW (PAYT)?

Pay more for More trash… Less for less.

Measured by bags or cans

Equity and incentive

Part of making Cost-Effective Choices…

Save as you throw (NY), Recycle & Save, Variable Rates, Unit based pricing …

SERA

SERA STUDY MEASURING PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS

Trad’lEduc?

Cost

Impact

#1 PAYT (3 effects)

Source: Skumatz, all rights reserved may be used with permission of author

SERA

Menu with VR/PAYT as an option

Financial incentives or grants

Active promotion or education

Key

Voluntary recommendations

Mandatory

Source: Skumatz Economic Research Associates Inc.,Seattle, WA, 2000 survey © SERA all rights reserved

PAYT/VARIABLE RATES LEGISLATION AT THE STATE LEVEL

White indicates no activity

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Yardwaste Recycling Source Red'n

PAYT BY THE NUMBERS

% Pop with PAYTAccess

# State Legislation on PAYT/SAYT

PAYT takes 17%Out of trash. 1/3 ➔ Recycling, 1/3 ➔ Organics, 1/3 ➔ SRNo City cost

# Communities with Access to PAYT/SAYT

Source: SERA research © all rights reserved

Majority of largest 100 cities have PAYT

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Growth in PAYT Programs over Time

SERA

PAYT - EFFECTIVE AND COST-EFFECTIVE

Effectiveness:

◼ Biggest impact*

DOUBLES recycling

Diverts ~1/5-1/6 from landfill

Curbside & D/O impacts

◼ 3 effects / cost-effective; zero cost for the SR portion

◼ No cost increase for 2/3

◼ Top driver in leading states

Goals/metrics, $, PAYT

◼ Lynchpin of leading jurisdictions

◼ No New Trucks

◼ Self-funding / paid by users

Concerns:◼ Strengths & weak-

nesses-political will

◼ Haulers – link to contracting (not linked)

◼ Haulers – other ways of implementing

◼ Low income, dumping, implementation cost

◼ Capital, predictions, MF

Considerations:

◼ Known BMPs / history

◼ Com’l PAYT

8Source for graphs and figures: Skumatz Economic Research Associates,© Source for “top 3 drivers, Skumatz & Freeman / SERA, “Colorado Roadmap Report, 20082/3 survey by Frable, iowa. (Also least expensive for GHG reduction)


SERA

PAYT PROS / CONS

9

Key Advantages DisadvantagesRewards all diversion activitiesNo new trucks down street (&wear/tear)Behavior / reminder; choiceUtility; equityWorks in variety of systems, tailorNEEDS NO SEPARATE FUNDING! –OWN FUNDING SOURCE - JUST A DIFFERENT WAY OF BILLING

Concerns about illegal dumping, equity (low income, large families), MF (see FAQs), change…More complex rate study, outreachHauler concerns (alternate implementation methods)Costs & savings - “Net” depends on local conditions

Source: SERA ©2008; Iowa State Survey by Frable. SERA

BEFORE & AFTER

AFTER

AFTER

BEFORE

BEFORE

BEFORE

BEFORE

Containers, Uniformity,

PAYT

SERA

11

FOUR MAIN TYPES OF PAYT SYSTEMS

➢ Carts by size – strong and growing, works best with automated,

➢ Bags or Tags by Number (with/without base fee)

➢ Hybrid➢ By Weight➢ Drop-offs

All but last in place in USEach has pros / consRegional patterns

SERA

12

OTHER CONTAINER QUESTIONS

Trends

Automated or not

Whose cart


SERA

PAYT BEST PRACTICESTo get best effects, there are key elements of design (and ordinance).

➢ Convenient Recycling available, large container, embedded best

➢ Optimal incentive levels ($ / % thresholds)

➢ Small trash containers available, rewarding good recyclers

➢ Parallel containerization (best if provided)

➢ Education / information

➢ Clear bill & reporting

➢ Enforcement / Level playing field

➢ … (or it isn’t worth it)

Without these, there are “tons left on the table!”13

SERA

BACKGROUND –AUTHORITIES?

…have the authority to provide or contract for solid waste trash collection services to the residential sector (<8 units)

… can’t ban others from providing service

… other tools available to assert increased authority over the residential and commercial sectors

SERA

15

MAIN WAYS TO GET PAYT IN PLACE

Ordinance◼ If multiple haulers servicing area and want

minimal disruption in service providers Contracting / districting / franchising◼ If multiple haulers servicing area and want

economies of scale, single provider Municipalization◼ Do it yourself, local decision-making, local

action

SERA

16

GETTING PAYT IN PLACE:ORDINANCE VS. CONTRACT -COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE

Licensing / Ordinance Pros Contract / Muni Pros

❑ Fewer Hauler (“Taking”) & Citizen Complaints (“Choice”)

❑ Maintains competition❑ No need for “notice”❑ Quick❑ Can specify rate “structure”❑ Minimal City effort (RFP, etc.)❑ Retains “level playing field” for

haulers – each implements the program and provides services knowing others will be operating under same rules.

❑ Lower Cost / bills❑ Fewer trucks, “cleaner” set outs,

reduced wear/tear on streets❑ One hauler to contact if problems

arise.❑ City “control” including

rates/setting; revenues❑ More flexible / easier to enforce

penalties than ordinance❑ Can “designate” facility

destinations for materials❑ Potential revenue source❑ (Similar for franchise / district

EXCEPT may not get lower bills if multiple awardees)

Sample language available for State legislation, contracts, ordinances, etc.at www.paytnow.org; paytwest.org; www.paytinfo.org

Source: SERA publications

http://www.paytwest.org/

http://www.paytinfo.org/


SERA

DECISIONS FOR ORGANIZING COLLECTION -

Source: SERA all rights reserved, may be used with permission of author

Economies of scaleControl / mandatesFewer trucks…Substantial savings… but…

SERA

WHY CITIES & HAULERS SHOULD LIKE PAYT

Cities Meet recycling goals

Easy to remove from taxes / bill

Equity / “utility”

Options for customers to save

Satisifies green customers

Self-funding

Keep city “clean”

Lower bills for residents like HOAs

Haulers Business opportunity – more revenues –

REQUIRE more services and reimbursed for it

Distinguishes from competitors – extra service to customer

Learn PAYT “skill” that may help expansion elsewhere

Options / not all can-based ($)

Options that don’t require “single hauler” (contracting) issue

Growth, positive perception from customers & cities

Vertically integrated haulers may like recycling; recycling not limited like Landfills

Don’t have a choice /

get on the band wagon?18


SERA

GETTING PAYT APPROVAL -POLITICIANS

Political Pros

Equity

Environ citizen group rec’m

Meeting goals; link to ultimate goal (recy, econ, enviro, jobs…)

Underperforming recycling-improve cost-effectiveness

Citizens demanding / moved from other places

Reduce costs (landfills)

Overconsumption / “buffet”; reduce tax burden; lasts

No one wants to waste

(Maybe enviro; depends)Can sometimes be driven by outside factors

(YW bans at LF, etc.)

Motivating

Make sure enviro council-member / champion brings in others…

Get enviros (and others) to your meetings – ALL the meetings

Have information on myths ready –naysayer comments to expect and be honest

Note hauler opportunities; small hauler case studies

Speaker from successful town

If planning a rate change…

19

Source: Skumatz publications

20

GETTING PAYT IN PLACE -ADDRESSING CONCERNS

• Getting In Place: Local level – ordinance vs. contract, muni (other / state legislation)

• Haulers? – consider different ways to implement; level playing field

• Small haulers? – educate, more skills, talk through issues in one-on-one meetings

• Electeds? – Surveys, case studies, the math

• Citizens? – different ways to implement? Options to save money. Surveys positive. Public process important (bills vs. rates)

• CAN’T OVEREMPHASIZE EDUCATION


SERA

21

MAJOR CONCERNS –ILLEGAL DUMPING

Surveys of 1000 communities - Bigger fear than reality Multiple surveys showed issues in 10-30% of

communities; solved after 3 months. Some communities showed improvements!

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Same Worse after PAYT

Better after PAYT

Illegal Dumping Pre/Post

PAYT

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

A B C D F

Non-PAYT PAYT

Illegal Dumping

Pre-post PAYT

Illegal Dumping in

PAYT and Non-PAYT

Towns

Source: SERA surveys – all rights reserved

Average grade 2.6 PAYT, 2.3 non-PAYT

Most Non-resNEED Bulky option3 month issue

SERA

PAYT CONCERNS / ISSUES TO ADDRESS

Illegal dumping

Large / poor families

Too costly

Change

Billing system

Capital cost

Doesn’t work

Taking away my hauler

Government stay out of trash / works fine

Don’t charge more for more kids in school…

Recycling goes to landfill

Put folks out of business

Benefits big haulers…

Others…

22


SERA

PROBLEMS: FEARSGREATER THAN REALITY

Solvable… see faqs

Fear Reality

Illegal dumping Minimal / low, short-lived –have BULKY option

Confusion, resistance to change

Continuing education (prior, free stickers)

Non-compliance Minimal

Contamination Minimal

Burning Banned (60%, illegal, seasonal, warn once then remove, charge more)

Self-haul and by-pass Base fee, mandatory (impacts on rates and setouts)

Revenues (esp. haulers) Less volatile systems, work with haulers in design, pilot

Private/multiple haulers Multiple colors, work with haulers

Local and regional economics

Depends on markets, LF ownership, processing, cost structure, prices

Source: Skumatz, all rights reserved SERA

PAYT NITTY-GRITTY


SERA

PREDICTABILITY - RATE SETTING & DESIGN Number of “revenue items” is key

◼ Prediction challenges, data

Revenue risk

◼ System type (can or fixed fee or hybrid)

◼ Customer charge, per capita charges,

◼ Set Outs are KEY

3 x30g historically – often down to 1 or 1.5 x 30 gal.

Research AND PHASE In differential

Source: Skumatz, SERA research, 2000,2001 ©

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

WA IL

Before VRAfter VR

0123456789

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1981 1984 1987 1990

Micro Mini One Two Three Four+TWO EFFECTS:

pull out recyc/yw

“stomping”


OPTIMAL PAYT RATE DIFFERENTIALS?

Not too high…

Not too low…

26

Mean=1.5x for double gallonsMedian 1.44

Source: SERA data&research©

1-1.5x for 2x the gallons –Incentive too

low

More thanneeded1.5-1.8x

“Optimal” PAYT differential

Biggest cost is getting truck to the door…

Covering costs an issue… - what if you’re too successful!?

SERA Statistical work studied diversion performance vs.

rate diffs.Source: Skumatz, all rights reserved

SERA

27

EVEN IN CALIFORNIA – TONS LEFT ON THE TABLE! (work for EPA)

CALIFORNIA

% Communities in Statewith Fully Variable Progs

% Communities in Statewith Variable Progs

% Communities in Statewith Limited Progs

% Communities in Statewith Extremely LimitedProgs% Communities in Statewith Other PAYT Progs

Source: Econservation Institute and SERA

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES TO INCREASE DIVERSION / TONS BEING LEFT BEHIND!!

Good programs

SERA

BAG VS. CART

Figure 2: Cost of PAYT Bags Purchased from Multiple Manufacturers – Lower end (MA Statewide Bids Valid thru 6/2016)

Boxes & Bags

Box/Bags Twist Tie

Mansfield Handle tie

Mansfield Twist tie

TBC - Wave

TBC Standard WasteZero

8 gal $0.131

10 gal $0.141

15 gal $0.124 $0.127 $0.154 $0.140 $0.122 $0.129 $0.156

30 gal $0.220 $0.238 $0.263 $0.234 $0.209 $0.214 $0.253

Added for distrib & billing $0.03-$0.05

$0.03-$0.05 $0.05-$0.06

Wtd Avg (33%/67% for 15/30g) $0.188 $0.201 $0.227 $0.203 $0.180 $0.186 $0.221

Wtd Avg (25%/75% for 15/30g) $0.196 $0.210 $0.236 $0.210 $0.187 $0.193 $0.229 Wtd avg using 10/30 gal at 25%/75%. $0.225

From these figures, it appears a competitive price for a “bag” (assuming a mix of smaller and larger bags) is between a low of $0.186 (from Tags Bags Containers, Inc.) to $0.236 from Mansfield Paper Company, Inc. (their “handle tie” design).

❑ Some evidence for greater recycling incentive with bags (logical) – not statistically significant

❑ Collection and enforcement issues / visually at each stop

❑ Cost for households higher with Bags; and if bags in cans, you incur the can cost…

Customer Container Cost - Bags vs. Wheelies

1 bag/wk 1.5 bags/wk 2 bags/wk Wheelie

Cost/Bag $0.20 $0.20 $0.20

Bags/Wk 1 1.5 2

Cost/Month $0.87 $1.30 $1.73 $1.00

1 year $10.39 $15.59 $20.78 $12.00

5 years $51.96 $77.94 $103.92 $60.00

10 years $103.92 $155.88 $207.84 $60.00

15 years $155.88 $233.82 $311.76 start again

1 bag/wk 1.5 bags/wk 2 bags/wk Wheelie

Cost/Bag $0.15 $0.15 $0.15

Bags/Wk 1 1.5 2

Cost/Month $0.65 $0.97 $1.30 $1.00

1 year $7.79 $11.69 $15.59 $12.00

5 years $38.97 $58.46 $77.94 $60.00

10 years $77.94 $116.91 $155.88 $60.00

15 years $116.91 $175.37 $233.82 start again

Source: Skumatz, all rights reserved


SERA

OTHER OPTIONS – RECYCLEBANKPAYT MORE TONS, LESS COST THAN OTHER INCENTIVE OPTIONS

$0

$20

$40

$60

PAYT RecycleBank™

◼ Incentives for recycling ONLY – <1/3 of PAYT’s impact

◼ RecycleBank™ incentive (also towns & haulers) Towns considering because: Hauler partnerships, “turnkey”,

jumpstart stalled recycling, no new billing (HOAs like it), strong marketing; having trouble getting recycling or PAYT in place… other

Impacts – tons BEYOND single stream / containers; fees; rebates; cost per ton; redemptions

See if it pencils out… can have both as well…

◼ Study “MATH”, outcomes & “deals” for other options…

Town Tons and HH Savings/Yr

Source: First graph from figures from EPA newsletter, 2009; 2nd graph from Skumatz study.

1500 TPY

1000 TPY

500 TPY

0 TPY

SERA

PAYT MORE TONS, LESS COST(than other incentives, RecycleBank™)


SERA

WHAT ELSE MIGHTMONTGOMERY COUNTYCONSIDER TO REACHGOALS?

SERA

COMMUNITYDRIVERS?...

May not be what you think…

3 Key factors:

❑ Goals / plans❑ Activist Staff❑ Residential progress

❑ Cities can MAKE THIS HAPPEN

Topic Driver Not

Goals established “Green” image Business interest Residential progress Facility investment Size / urban / suburban Landfill shortage Disposal tip fees Region of the country Market access Staff activity Regional planning agency Council / commissioners (electeds) Voters Haulers Local task forces State planners

Source: Skumatz Economic Research Associates research ©


SERA

EFFICIENT, EFFECTIVE OPTIONS FOR STEPPING IT UP NOW

High Diversion Impact

Savings / C/E

Residential: Pay As You Throw (PAYT), optimized collections, PAYT enhancements, organics and recycling without barriers, organized collection

Commercial: barriers, PAYT, new delivery, C&D

Incentives / taxes, mandates / bans

Education ? ?Measuring to goal

Source: Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. analysis SERA

MONTGOMERY COUNTY…

Issues / Gaps for getting to 70+%:

◼ PAYT (understand predictability issues)

◼ Small recycling containers a big problem

◼ Don’t need weekly recycling

◼ No food waste collection; yard waste decals

◼ Commercial inaction?

◼ Measurement - we’ll see about the waste sort!

◼ Independent cities and authorities; not uniform, contracted / not contracted areas

Optimizing performance / bang for the buck

◼ Get more for the same cost (program improvements)

◼ Or Pay less for the same

◼ Examine cost-effectiveness of changes

SERA

OPTIMIZING COLLECTIONS –HOW FAR SHOULD YOU GO?

3 stops / week –old style!(Trash 2x/wk)Recy wkly

2 stops / weekTrash wklyRecy wkly

1 stop/wk Trash wkly to MWP (performance? with recy?)

3 stops / weekTrash wklyRecy wklyOrg wkly

2 stops / weekTrash wklyOrgs & Recy Alt

1.5 stops / weekTrash EOWRecy & Org AltWet wkly/dry EOW (wet-dry uses 3)

2 stops / weekOrgs WklyTrash & Recy AltWet-dry (uses 3)

Integrated coll’n(city or hauler)

L O W E R C O S T / M O N T H

MORE

DIVERSION

See SERA article in Resource RecyclingSource: Skumatz, all rights reserved SERA

PAYT & RESIDENTIAL OPTIMIZATION

Mini or micro can

◼ Well-established, years

◼ Successful, integrates

EOW recycling (-1-3%, ½ the collections!)

Add Food / organics,embedded, without barriers – All organics adds 20% plus

EOW Trash

◼ Drives use of food if organics weekly / seasonal, trash EOW

Source: SERA

Universal ordinance

“No bin no barrel”

Higher rate if you DON’T set out recycling or organics

Efficiencies –◼ More for the same

◼ The same for less…

◼ Half as many trucks

Portland (54%=>70%) – citywide, trash down 38% Renton- +25% R; +44%O; -20%G


SERA

TRADE A STOP - ITS ALL ABOUT THE COLLECTIONS! TIP FEE TRADEOFF TABLE

MONTHLY CHANGE IN TIPPING PORTION - Moving to Organics from disposal - positive (red)

means increase in costsMONTHLY incremental tipping portion of cost assuming 70 lbs of organics collected per MONTH, whether

collected weekly, every other week, or… Bold lines are range for common tip fees for organics processing

LF Tip across;

YW tip down $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100

$10 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40 -$1.75 -$2.10 -$2.45 -$2.80 -$3.15

Organics $20 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40 -$1.75 -$2.10 -$2.45 -$2.80

tip fee $30 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40 -$1.75 -$2.10 -$2.45

per ton $40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40 -$1.75 -$2.10

down $50 $1.40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40 -$1.75

matrix $60 $1.75 $1.40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40

$70 $2.10 $1.75 $1.40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05

$80 $2.45 $2.10 $1.75 $1.40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70

$90 $2.80 $2.45 $2.10 $1.75 $1.40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00 -$0.35

$100 $3.15 $2.80 $2.45 $2.10 $1.75 $1.40 $1.05 $0.70 $0.35 $0.00

"=Per Month

Tip Diffc $0.00 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00

$/mo $0.00 -$0.35 -$0.70 -$1.05 -$1.40 -$1.75 -$2.10 -$2.45 -$2.80 -$3.15

©SERA 2016Source: Skumatz, all rights reserved SERA

OTHER RESIDENTIAL CHANGES TO CONSIDER

Single stream – depends. Data says increase of 40% in recycling collection, and 15% savings

Consider (additional) contracting – stronger enforcement, economies of scale / savings (SERA research shows 10-25% savings from not splitting, plus density benefits)

Bans/ mandates – 3-11x the tons of voluntary (SERA research)

Education – do more with your funds (not the most cost-effective) - not same old same old

◼ Self-efficacy,

◼ Motivate / don’t inform,

◼ Targeting / their values,

◼ Social marketing for barriers / trust, and retention of change (and door-to-door works!)

Overall, look at Cost-effectiveness and MEASURE.

SERA

HOW TIDE DOESN’T SELL

It does sell miraclesSource: Skumatz, all rights reserved SERA

MORE EDUCATION!?


SERA

41

METRICS – REFLECTING GOALS & IMPACTS

Successful diversion of

recyclables & hierarchy

Successful diversion of organics & hierarchy

Reuse and Source reduction

Diversion of HHW; Toxics

reduction

Cost-effectiveness

Upstream change,

stewardship

SustainabilityTriple Bottom

Line (TBL)

Satisfaction, participation, set

outs, indirect effects, others…

See Resource Recycling Article last year


42

TRADITIONAL TON-BASED METRICS


# 1 CONCERN – NOTPROSPECTIVE

SERA

MEASUREMENT DATA ISSUES

43

Fragmented haulers

◼ Relatively few contracts / franchises or municipal collection services

Private landfills / disposal sites

Little authority (invoked); “estimates”

Costs and authority affect data availability

… and that’s just even talking residential! Commercial even more complicated / fragmented

Measuring at collection doesn’t account for what really goes to market – should be at end point

➔With this in mind – major pros / cons

SERA

44

PERCENT RECOVERABLES REMAINING (PRR) – 3 SUB-CALCULATIONS FOR PRIORITIES & PROGRESS

, Measure progress over time

NOT AT POINT OF COLLECTION – NOT INFLATEDSource: Skumatz, all rights reserved


SERA

KEY COMMERCIAL STRATEGIES

#1 PAYT

◼ Mandate recycling cost embedded in trash fee (50%-150% of trash size)

◼ Organics embedded

◼ Small commercial

◼ Eliminates barrier of ‘recycling adds avoidable cost’

◼ Space / screening issues

C&D

◼ Require recycling with trash bins

◼ Rebate program a la San Jose (needinfrastructure)

SERA

KEY COMMERCIAL STRATEGIES

Tip Fee Incentives

◼ Surcharges; tax forgiveness

◼ SERA Research on uptake of programs

ABC Law

Invoicing / bidding improvements for recycling uptake & savings

◼ Barrier

◼ Invoice & contract issues

◼ Encourage bidding / education / website

SERA

INTEGRATED DECISIONS –AFFECTED BY…

Are trucks flexible…? Site / destination limitations…

◼ Fully-automated helps… easily shift between materials

◼ Don’t have to bring materials to same location like split trucks

Recycling processing

◼ Single stream (& large containers) helps… one collection, large containers that can wait

◼ Can do dual stream by alternating material weeks

Organics processing essential

Education concerns

◼ Which week? Very manageable

Perception & containerization

Health departments & regulators

◼ For every other week collection

◼ For food scraps composting

SERA

48

PAYT - WHAT ABOUT…

HOAs?

MF?

Commercial?


SERA

49

PAYT SUMMARY

Effective, cost-effective, strong track record Technical issues rarely the problem➔ performs

◼ Pilot test / phase in◼ Strong diversion (all types), speedy, attitudes, retention, track

record (7,100 towns), flexible / tailorable ➔ local Public process, public education. Good customer

education / understanding crucial◼ Education / why, how it works, how to make it work for me,

packages for move-ins

Politics, political will is the key stumbling block◼ Suggestions from communities; & champion◼ Negatives manageable if political will

THANK YOU!!

Questions?

PAYT Resources: Fact sheets, FAQ, case studies,

Data, Rate model, peer match, webinars, manuals…

Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph.D.Skumatz Economic Research Associates (SERA)

303/494-1178 [email protected]

Web resources: www.paytnow.org;

www.paytinfo.org; serainc.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.paytnow.org/

PAYT/SAYT PROS, CONS, TOPICS AND HOW IT CAN WORK PAYT ...€¦ · Goals/metrics, $, PAYT Lynchpin...

Documents

Transcript of PAYT/SAYT PROS, CONS, TOPICS AND HOW IT CAN WORK PAYT ...€¦ · Goals/metrics, $, PAYT Lynchpin...