I live in a small town because when it comes to local politics, the fewer the better. It was one of the major reasons that we moved from University Heights.  R.I.T.A. is just an ugly memory for me at this point.  With that in mind, you might think I would be outraged that my local Trustees put our trash pickup out to bid to consolidate it down from at least five carriers to only one.  There is no doubt that it reduces individual choice and puts governmental involvement where there previously wasn't any.  It seems smart to me though.

There is a group (maybe just one loud person) who stands in opposition.  Opposition is cool. Well, most opposition is cool.  Then I read the pamphlet / survey that was sent to my house today.  Let's visit the pamphlet.

When it comes to the trash hauler serving your home, would you rather preserve your freedom of choice or have the Township government grant one hauler a monopoly?  

Uh oh.  I hate to go all economist on you, but the Trustees didn't grant a monopoly.  They engaged in a proposal process with multiple carriers and signed a contract with one for a limited time.  At the end of said contract, presumably, the trustees will revisit the contract and consider multiple suppliers again.  

This is NOT a monopoly due to the fact that there are multiple providers.  Monopolistic situations are characterized by a lack of economic competition. I could easily argue that this is the complete opposite as companies will be competing for the contract consistently every few years.  If the trustees do their jobs right, it should be cheaper too as the companies will be weighed against each other more easily and efficiently than if each citizen did so on an individual basis.

The document I received was also designed to take the pulse of the citizenry of Russell.  Included is a card so that people can "vote" their opinion on the issue.  But the creators of this "ballot" failed miserably in making their initiative relevant.  It fails in every possible way of making its results statistically relevant.  There are two options to put an X in the box.  Box number 1 is "CHOICE" and box number 2 is "MONOPOLY."

So, as someone who is in favor of this measure, I am required to put an X in the box for "MONOPOLY" despite the fact that it clearly is not a monopoly?  So if I don't vote and send it back, then I won't be counted?  If I do send it then I will be counted by whom, exactly?  Will I be falsely judged by the recipient as someone who is actually in favor of a monopoly?

Opposition is cool.  But don't pretend to care about the will of the people with your propaganda.  I don't even have a problem that these people don't like the idea.  Their opinion is just as valid as mine.  What is more harmful to my community though;  Trustees acting on our behalf legally, even if poorly in some people's opinions, or a manipulative corrupt "study" that disingenuously tries to paint public opinion?  I'll take the trustees and my ability to vote them out over these activists and their horrendously obnoxious propaganda.

Overall, the trash provider consolidation seems like a good idea to me.  Sure, I don't get to choose the company that picks up my trash anymore, but consolidating my little town's buying power should produce some benefits.  We should save some marginal wear and tear on our roads. Most importantly, by consolidating our buying power we should all be able to get a better deal.  That's the idea anyway.  If it doesn't work then we can switch suppliers.  Better yet, when the time comes, we can choose new Trustees should we need them.  That seems like an awful lot of choice for something described incorrectly as a "MONOPOLY."