Why are you trying to take our choice away?

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Postby Devils Advocate » Fri Jan 17, 2003 9:05 pm

Mark, I asked this question of Denise, It is only fair that I ask it of you.

Do you or do you not believe every citizen in this town should have a right to vote for a transfer facility on LR, or Curbside?
Devils Advocate
 

Postby Denise O'Dwyer » Fri Jan 17, 2003 9:11 pm

"DA"
Thats right, I don't want the citizens to have a choice. Would you please wake up, people are reading this thread. They know what I wrote and they know Why I wrote it. No matter how you take it out of context. It is there in black in white.
Lawrence Road was not the recommended site for a TS. This site should not even be considered. A TS should be a choice but not with this site attached to it.

Why should the people of this town be made to pay for the BOS trying save their egos?

You know as well as I do these games your playing don't work. People reading this thread know exactly what your up to. Stop trying to be so high and mighty, your not. God knows I am not, but I don't pretend to be. I am only one voice with one vote. I will cast my vote in April.

"Come on people we can do better" Right "DA" :wink:

Denise
Denise O'Dwyer
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:33 am

Postby betty » Fri Jan 17, 2003 9:15 pm

Why is it so hard to provide a simple choice. Curbside or transfer station on lawrence road. I will live with curbside if it passes, you should live with the ts if it passes. Whatever happened to trusting the people to decide?
Betty
betty
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 11:09 pm

Postby Devils Advocate » Fri Jan 17, 2003 9:45 pm

Denise, it is you that obviously does not get it. I WILL SPELL IT OUT,
There is no other site other than Lawrence Road. It is a fact. I like many others, whether you care to believe it or not want a transfer station. We think it is the best and most viable solution for our solid waste solution. I can respect your right to disagree on that. But I cannot accept not allowing all the voters of Merrimack to have a choice. Perhaps not on this forum, but I do believe most pro curbside advocates believe in the will of the people and do not have a problem with this choice. Your one choice cannot be the only choice. My rights and opinions are as valid as yours.
Devils Advocate
 

Postby Norman Phillips » Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:47 pm

DA and Betty:
  • QUESTION: Why have you not answered Mark Fitzgerald's post of 2:25 pm today? He has provided the relevant results of the outside consultant that the Town manager hired a year ago.
  • ANSWER: Is it because you have no answer?
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby betty » Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:56 pm

Norman, You have got to be kidding? This is the quote you want me to address?

"Self Haul Costs

A comparison of town-wide curbside collection with self-haul to a transfer station must account for the individual cost incurred by each resident each time they travel to the transfer station. Otherwise the comparison ignores a significant part of the cost of a self-haul based system. "


What gibberish, self haul cost are necessary because they are a part of the self haul based system? Mark and Norm may add clsoe to an extra million dollars for this but again, it is nonsence. This guy was under pressure to recognise this that is simply a made up figure.

Give it a rest guys We all know what you are doing and just how one sided it is.

Betty
betty
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 11:09 pm

Postby Norman Phillips » Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:12 pm

Betty, those costs have meaning only for anyone who is obligated to consider the SW costs for the entire town, such as the consultant, and, I might add, the Budget Committee. Any individual citizen is free to disregard them when s/he casts their vote. I therefore do not expect you to anwer that item, since you obviously do not consider the cost to the entire town.

But Mark did list financial figures for curbside and transfer station. Why do you not recognize those as meaningful? Are you incapable of doing so?
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Devils Advocate » Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:20 pm

Norm, I did not realize that was even a question. It also was addressed to Betty, not I. I have to agree with Betty though. You have got to be kidding. Have you read this thread from start to finish? There should be no question in your mind on where I stand concerning these numbers if you have. We hired a private consultant, he comes up with a set of numbers. We put together a second adhoc comittee, another set of numbers. Why did we pay for a consultant if we were not going to accept his numbers and form another comittee. We both know the answer to that, Special interests. As I have suggested, unfortunatly to late, hire another consultant. I am sure his numbers will be different also. And on and on it goes. Everyone will come up with a different set of numbers and that is the crutch of the problem. They have become unbelieveable no matter who puts these numbers together. But I thank you for simplifying all of these numbers on the other thread you responded to. 152 dollars a year for a transfer facility on LR (3-4) dollars a week. Those are numbers we all can understand on a ballot. To me it is a more than acceptable price for any and all that choose to use the new transfer facility on LR.
Devils Advocate
 

Postby betty » Sat Jan 18, 2003 12:18 am

DA, It won't even cost us that! WE have 3.3 million so either curbside or the ts will be "free" for the first year. We simply need to vote for the use of our money. After that, the curbside costs 1.8 million and the ts is 1.2 million. So in Norms terms, the ts cost $2/week and the curbside is $3/week.
Betty
betty
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 11:09 pm

Postby Norman Phillips » Sat Jan 18, 2003 9:01 am

:D Dream on, laddies. :D
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Sat Jan 18, 2003 9:42 am

betty, did you really say.......

WE have 3.3M so either curbside or the ts will be "free" for the first year


Where did the $3.3M come from betty? Better yet, where is it GOING to come from?
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby betty » Sat Jan 18, 2003 10:42 am

Mark, you and Norm make a point, we have the money but the budget committee is trying to prevent us from getting the money WE SAVED as well as in the current operating budget. The battle has switched to the bc. It is part of your relentless effort to use every force you can muster in order to disenfranchise the voters. It is and remains a simple matter of the lawrence crew trying to take OUR CHOICE AWAY.
Betty
betty
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 11:09 pm

Postby Norman Phillips » Sat Jan 18, 2003 1:16 pm

Betty, you do not understand. The Budget Committee is elected by the voters to advise them on the prudential appropriation of public money. This is spelled out clearly in the Municipal Budget Law, RSA 32.


The point of contention, as reported in the Telegraph this morning, is a simple one. The Budget Committee wants more information from the Selectmen; that is all. And it reminded the Selectmen that it is not without recourse if it does not get this information.

The Budget Committee is entitled to this information because without that information, the Committee cannot carry out its duties.

It is somewhat similar to the two articles being proposed by the BOS asking opinion of voters about curbside or transfer station. Those articles also have no information in them.

It is almost like there is a pattern.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby betty » Sat Jan 18, 2003 1:25 pm

Norm, The information was supplied! This is nothing more than a political game desgned to take away the choice of the people. We have the money for both options, the numbers were already supplied. Your threat that you will zero out the ts option reveals your true intent here. Once again, this is another backdoor trick to get it off lawrence road. How is it that 22 homes WHO CHOSE TO LIVE THERE have more rights than the 30,000 in this town?

Betty
betty
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 11:09 pm

Postby joe179 » Sat Jan 18, 2003 1:48 pm

betty,

I believe the issue at hand is the lack of total and comprehensive cost.

It is incumbent upon the BOS to provide these details or we will run the risk of handing the town a blank check-- to fill in the bottom line once they have determined the true and total costs (at taxpayer expense). If they have done their homework, this information should be readily available. There is no need for flailing or posturing to comply with a simple request for the comprehensive cost associated with these proposed warrant articles.

We all need to know this to make an informed choice at the polls.
User avatar
joe179
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:17 am
Location: Merrimack

PreviousNext

Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron