Trash Pickup Fee Heads for June Ballot : Budget: Fee would average $9 a month for each homeowner. San Diego and Coronado are the only cities in county that don’t charge for weekly trash pickup.

San Diego city homeowners, who have never had to pay for trash pickup, will be asked in June to approve a fee for that service in exchange for incentives such as free recycling and enhanced police, fire and library service, the City Council decided Monday.

After five hours of debate on a series of possible ballot proposals, most of which were delayed, the council voted, 5 to 4, to place the trash plan before voters. If approved, the new fees, which will average about $9 a month per homeowner, would bring in $26 million a year.

The ballot measure affects 300,000 households, or about half the residences in the city. Condominium dwellers, renters and commercial businesses pay a fee outright for trash pickup or through condo fees or rent.

“It’s time for people to realize that they have to pay for the trash they generate,” said Councilwoman Judy McCarty, a leading proponent of the refuse plan.

In San Diego County, only the cities of San Diego and Coronado do not charge for weekly trash pickup.

A 28-member citizen committee assembled to develop measures to place on this year’s ballot came up with the idea of charging trash pickup fees. While the entire City Council seemed to agree with the proposal, four members voted against it because the program was not specific enough.

Several wanted the program to include a reduced rate for the poor or elderly, a fee based on the amount of trash generated, and free recycling programs. Others said the money should be applied toward increased police and fire protection and more libraries, parks and recreation facilities.

Officials will work out the precise details of the trash program when it comes up for a second vote later this month.

Without money earmarked for specific purposes or incentives, it is unclear who would vote to raise fees for a service that has been free since 1919. Council members insisted that the fees must be levied to make the system more equitable.

The council also tackled two other controversial measures that deal with police protection. But officials delayed a decision on both for two weeks so that administrators could figure out possible funding and impact on local crime.

Under one endorsed by the managed-growth group Prevent Los Angelization Now!, new development could not occur if it lowers the ratio of police officers to population. Critics say that limiting growth will drive up the cost of housing. They also contend that the measure is merely a springboard for the expected mayoral bid of the plan’s author, Peter Navarro.

Under the second proposal, supported by Councilmen Ron Roberts, Tom Behr and Bob Filner and by the San Diego police union, the police force would be increased nearly 80% by the end of the decade without raising taxes.

The three councilmen said the money could come from the existing budget, but Mayor Maureen O’Connor and others challenged them to show what services would have to be cut in order to add more than 1,000 officers by 1999.

“You need to disclose a revenue source,” O’Connor said. “Is it going to be at the expense of their kids’ after-school recreation programs? Is it going to be at the expense of the lifeguards at the beach? Is it going to be at the expense of a firefighter not getting to a house when someone has a heart attack and not be able to be revived in time? This is something people have to know.”

Roberts said the money can be found and instructed City Manager Jack McGrory to figure out where. McGrory, a pained expression on his face, said he is in the midst of a $25-million budget deficit and is busily trying to develop the 1983-84 budget, suggesting that he has no clue where the money will come from.

“Somehow, when this bureaucracy needs the money, it finds the money,” Roberts said.

Late Monday, it appeared that both proposals were doomed. Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer, for example, said she would not vote for either plan because backers had not gathered the necessary signatures to place them on the ballot.

Navarro said it was clear to him that the council was ready to “take the coward’s way out” by rejecting his proposal and noted that his group would easily collect the signatures necessary.

“The City Council’s way is to do nothing and the beat goes on,” he said. “So we have violence in the streets, the most overcrowded courts and jails in the country, and not enough police officers. They’re politicians and they don’t want to deal with any of this.”

At the last moment, Councilman John Hartley and O’Connor unveiled a joint proposal to add hundreds of reserve police officers to the force, in the same numbers as Roberts, Behr and Filner had proposed for sworn officers last month.

Rather than spend $39 million to $54 million by 1999 for new officers, Hartley said adding volunteer reserve officers would cost only about $7.7 million, mostly for uniforms, training and small stipends.

The San Diego Police Department has about 158 reserve officers but is budgeted for up to 400. However, so few people want to join the program that the department has never been able to keep more than about 200.

Assistant Police Chief Ken Fortier warned that reserve officers cannot be relied on for consistent duty because they normally work other jobs.

Roberts agreed.

“The fact of the matter is that you can’t depend on reserves to pull you through the kind of crises we’re seeing,” he said. “What we need to do is build a police force. That is clearly our responsibility as a city of San Diego.”