HOW WILL THE TRANSFER STATION BE FUNDED?

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Postby RBarnes » Tue Nov 25, 2003 12:19 pm

Devils Advocate wrote:Recycling, a waste of time and effort and is actually not cost effective or enviromentally friendly. That is a myth and more feel good politics.


DA, maybe Dennis should be asking you if you want to kill the TS. Recycling has been PROVEN in Merrimack to help keep costs down. Rather then having to PAY to dispose of the trash if recycled we GET PAID even if it is break even for what we pay for labor in rounding it up and shipping it off we still come out ahead because it is trash we aren't paying for.

Devils Advocate wrote:Quikhippo is right, status quo is the way it was and always should be.


I ask you the same question then... status quo meaning what? 100% funding through tipping fees?

Devils Advocate wrote:Our town voted overwhelmingly to have a TS station when as you CS supporters insist that 2/3 of the town hire local haulers. If that is the case, for the life of me I will never understand why CS failed.


People were LIED to. Simple as that. But as you pointed out before I thought you felt people voted simply out of hate? After all you view Merrimack as a vial hatefilled town were people didn't care about costs or anything else, they just wanted to stick it to the people of LR.

Devils Advocate wrote:You will find the same results if a pay t warrant is added to the ballot. It will fail.


Personally I hope it does. The TS will fail that much quicker if people are forced to subsidize local business in their taxes or going the only other route if the local business actually have to pay their share of tipping you will slowly see them go under as WM and BFI who will take their trash directly out of town will be able to far undercut their prices.

Devils Advocate wrote:I will say it again, I have been taxed to death in this town, for that money that I am taxed, I think my tax bill should cover 52 weeks of trash at this facility without adding pay t.


The 2.4 million this facility requires to operate has to come from somewhere.


Devils Advocate wrote:If people want to continue to use private haulers because it is easier for them, so be it, no one is forcing you too pay for that convience.


Self-hauling is a convenience?????????? Then it would seem to me people really have nothing better to do and there are a lot of people with meaningless lives. But if you are forcing the TS to be covered with taxes you ARE forcing them to pay for the "convience" of having to haul their own trash or force them to pay even more to hire someone.

Devils Advocate wrote:Just an average joes perspective


Don't you mean a local haulers perspective? :wink:
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

What is to you?

Postby Jeannine Stergios » Tue Nov 25, 2003 12:54 pm

To Mark

Why do you EVEN care what we do with our trash? You don't even live here anymore!!

Why don't you start a Nashua Forum and give it up!!

FYI - I DO NOT SELF-HAUL - but I do have the choice to do so.
Jeannine Stergios
 
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 6:36 pm
Location: Jessica Drive Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:06 pm

Jeannine,

Enlighten me as to why where I happen to live has to do with the question I posed to you. Or were you simply taking the easy route to avoiding questions concerning the issue by bringing up where a reader may live? You don't seem to have any issues with siding with anon posters who could be from anywhere, funny you mention where I may or may not live. Funny, but telling.......you're stuck.

So I'll ask again just because I enjoy watching you squirm. FYI the questions you avoided by bringing up where I live are in bold letters. :D

That's the funny thing about people who claim its all about "choice". They don't extend this priviledge to giving people a CHOICE as to whether or not they want to subsidize your self-hauling.

You now have your CHOICE to self-haul, why can't those who either by CHOICE or due to their living arrangement (condos) have a CHOICE whether or not to carry you on their back forever? Or do the choices stop where it best benefits you financially? Funny.


Can I expect an answer to these questions or are you going to bring up something about where I went to college? :D :D :D :D :D
Last edited by Mark Fitzgerald on Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby RBarnes » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:08 pm

Jeannine, Mark like anyone else has freedom of speech and can say and post anything he likes anywhere he likes. I for one am interested in what he has to say since he has put far more time into researching SW options for this town then just about anyone else.

If we are going to limit this board to Merrimack residence only then unless anon posters come clean as to their real identies then we need to limit them as well.Jeannine, Mark like anyone else has freedom of speech and can say and post anything he likes anywhere he likes. I for one am interested in what he has to say since he has put far more time into researching SW options for this town then just about anyone else.

If we are going to limit this board to Merrimack residence only then unless anon posters come clean as to their real identities then we would need to limit them as well since they may not live in Merrimack either. For that matter we do not know what their bias is or were they are from. They could be local haulers defending the hauling industry; they could be Internet trolls posting things just to get a rise out of people, they could be just about anyone from anywhere. Mark doesn’t hide his bias or the fact he lives outside of Merrimack. He posts suggestions and questions he feels can help people he still cares about. I have a lot of respect for him because of that.

My question back to you is why do you care why he posts here? Do you seek to put a stop to free speech of anyone who may disagree with you?
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:12 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:So I'll ask again just because I enjoy watching you squirm. FYI the questions you avoided by bringing up where I live are in bold letters. :D

That's the funny thing about people who claim its all about "choice". They don't extend this priviledge to giving people a CHOICE as to whether or not they want to subsidize your self-hauling.

You now have your CHOICE to self-haul, why can't those who either by CHOICE or due to their living arrangement (condos) have a CHOICE whether or not to carry you on their back forever? Or do the choices stop where it best benefits you financially? Funny.


Can I expect an answer to these questions or are you going to bring up something about where I went to college? :D :D :D :D :D


Mark, since I do live in Merrimack I'll ask that same question as well as the follow... why does choice stop at having a TS? Why not give choice to who has to fund it as well?
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Tom Williams » Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:05 am

It sounds to me like some don't understand (or refuse to acknowledge) what is actually going on with the current CS arrangement.

The fee that is paid by present "curbsiders" to the local haulers consists of two basic parts, lets call them "A" and "B".

A = cost for trucks, salaries, fuel, overhead, licenses, etc. to operate the business.
B = fee paid to the Town of Merrimack to dump the trash.

I currently employ one of these local haulers, and because I choose to do this, I freely accept paying part "A". Part "B", together with our taxes, is going to pay the entire cost of our transfer station operation unless PAYT is implemented.

I do not intend in any way to try to get self-haulers to pay any portion of my part "A" costs. However, what I am reading here from some self-haulers is that they plan for my part “B” costs to pay for their free dumping privileges. This is not fair.

The “choice” that we all have is whether we choose to pay the part “A” costs, or self-haul. Part “B”, which are the Town’s cost of TS operations, should be shared by everyone who dumps trash in the TS, regardless of how it gets there.
Tom Williams
"Treating businesses and affluent people as prey, rather than assets, often pays off politically in the short run-- and elections are held in the short run." -- Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Tom Williams
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:42 pm
Location: Merrimack, NH & Dunwoody, GA

Postby RBarnes » Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:31 am

Tom Williams wrote:It sounds to me like some don't understand (or refuse to acknowledge) what is actually going on with the current CS arrangement.

The fee that is paid by present "curbsiders" to the local haulers consists of two basic parts, lets call them "A" and "B".

A = cost for trucks, salaries, fuel, overhead, licenses, etc. to operate the business.
B = fee paid to the Town of Merrimack to dump the trash.

I currently employ one of these local haulers, and because I choose to do this, I freely accept paying part "A". Part "B", together with our taxes, is going to pay the entire cost of our transfer station operation unless PAYT is implemented.

I do not intend in any way to try to get self-haulers to pay any portion of my part "A" costs. However, what I am reading here from some self-haulers is that they plan for my part “B” costs to pay for their free dumping privileges. This is not fair.

The “choice” that we all have is whether we choose to pay the part “A” costs, or self-haul. Part “B”, which are the Town’s cost of TS operations, should be shared by everyone who dumps trash in the TS, regardless of how it gets there.


Tom, I do understand and I happen to agree with you but likewise the portion of Part "B" accrued by business trash etc should not be passed on to the taxpayers. Using the break out of trash amounts supplied by the town we see commercial haulers bringing in two sets of trash amounts...

6500 from residents hiring someone and 4500 from businesses hiring someone.

It would be completely inappropriate and unfair if the costs businesses accrue to be covered by taxes. The only way to get around that is to put the correct portion of the cost into tipping fees. And if we look at the over all break down of haulers vs. self-haulers we see about a 60-40 split. Therefore anything over 40% being covered in our taxes would put the over all burden of the cost onto the taxpayers.

By the way I’m interested in knowing if anyone else knows more about the warrant article Mr. Mowers was referring to last night. He claimed back when the tipping fees were first discussed in this town that there was a vote in that the whole cost would be covered by tipping and since that article was never rescinded it would thereby be inappropriate for the town to put ANY of the cost into the taxes.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Nat Fairbanks » Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:23 am

RBarnes wrote:By the way I’m interested in knowing if anyone else knows more about the warrant article Mr. Mowers was referring to last night. He claimed back when the tipping fees were first discussed in this town that there was a vote in that the whole cost would be covered by tipping and since that article was never rescinded it would thereby be inappropriate for the town to put ANY of the cost into the taxes.

This can be seen in the town code section 138-4, also the section of town code that allows the selectmen to set the tipping fee as long as they hold a public hearing and publish it 30 days in advance. merrimack town code
138-4. Fees.

A.Household solid waste generated within the geographic limits of the Town, but excluding bulky metals and metal scraps in excess of 1,000 pounds, vehicle parts, vehicle bodies, hazardous, nuclear and other illegal or unacceptable materials, may be deposited at the facility free of charge, provided that:

(1)Refuse is hauled in a private (not for hire) vehicle, having a net legal load limit of 1,000 pounds or less, unless the individual can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the facility attendants that the waste is entirely from his own household residence;

(2)Refuse is properly separated and deposited in designated areas; and

(3)A decal available from the Town Clerk is displayed conspicuously.

B.All commercial, industrial and agricultural uses and operations in the Town of Merrimack shall pay a fee of $40 per ton of solid waste to dispose of solid waste at the facility. [Amended by the Board of Selectmen 6-7-1990, effective 7-9-1990]

C.All persons depositing unmounted tires at the facility shall pay a fee of $2 for each unmounted tire.

D.The Board of Selectmen of the Town of Merrimack shall have the authority to revise the fees charged commercial customers per ton, per trip, or by such other means they should deem fit, including the authority to charge and impose fees for the disposal of solid waste requiring special handling. Before the adoption of any such revised fee schedule or before the imposition of fee collection for the special handling of certain materials, the Selectmen shall hold a public hearing, and they shall publish a notice of any fee increase in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town at least 30 days prior to the implementation of any increase or implementation of a new fee schedule for the special handling of certain materials. [Amended 5-16-1991 by the ATM, Art. 23]


-Nat
Nat Fairbanks
 
Posts: 1020
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 1:05 am
Location: Merrimack NH

Postby Tom Williams » Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:50 am

RBarnes wrote:likewise the portion of Part "B" accrued by business trash etc should not be passed on to the taxpayers.


Rick, I agree. I was trying to simplify thing to make my point about the two forms of residential trash disposal. I think there will have to be some way to distinguish between residential and commercial trash delivered to the TS by commercial haulers.
Tom Williams
"Treating businesses and affluent people as prey, rather than assets, often pays off politically in the short run-- and elections are held in the short run." -- Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Tom Williams
 
Posts: 1031
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:42 pm
Location: Merrimack, NH & Dunwoody, GA

Postby RBarnes » Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:38 am

Tom Williams wrote:I think there will have to be some way to distinguish between residential and commercial trash delivered to the TS by commercial haulers.


If haulers have to make two sets of trips to collect the trash that too would increase their costs. But other then having two sets of trucks or having to make two trips I don't see any other way.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:52 am

In light of the news that tipping is now set at $110 I'm interested in hearing from Dennis, DA, LT, US etc. and hearing their take on this.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Re: What is to you?

Postby Norman Phillips » Wed Nov 26, 2003 12:23 pm

[quote="Jeannine S."]To Mark

Why do you EVEN care what we do with our trash? You don't even live here anymore!!/quote]

Jeanine, Mark Fitzgerald knows more about disposal of solid waste than any one other person in Merrimack. I am glad that he posts.
He devoted an untold number of hours to this subject beginning in early 2001, or earlier.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Nov 26, 2003 12:30 pm

Norman,

I appreciate the kind words, but the truth is..............

I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:



In any case, in many ways I wish I didn't get so involved, it comes with a price. But since I did I will ALWAYS have an interest in how the program in MMK works out. Always. Next stop.....PAYT.

I'm contacting the people in Nashua about the same subject. Maybe the two towns could form a joint Ad-hoc committee on the subject!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Good

Postby Jeannine Stergios » Wed Nov 26, 2003 12:40 pm

Norm

I do appreciate Mark's involvement in 2001 - I really do. I also understand his continued interest in something he was very much involved with. But he does not need to continue his quest - the decisions have been made - good or bad. And Mark moved - which I can understand from his point of view. I might have done the same thing in his position.

But to lash out when someone on this forum doesn't agree with him is futile now.

Mark, I am sorry about your situation. It's obvious that you cared about Merrimack. It's a shame that you moved.
Jeannine Stergios
 
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 6:36 pm
Location: Jessica Drive Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Wed Nov 26, 2003 1:03 pm

Jeannine,

I didn't lash out at you. I asked you a simple question concerning why your stated desire for choice ended with the method of trash disposal and excluded its funding. Your response was to ask me why I care since I moved, which not only had nothing to do with the topic, but also flew in the face of your repeated willingness to accept praise from anons who could be from Mars for all you know.

I met some REALLY good people in MMK. I won't mention them all by name, because my doing so would probably hurt them given my history :D . I also met some people that made me want to light myself on fire, but I'm sure that would happen anywhere. I consider the SW issue to been a character-building experience, I don't regret a thing aside from the time it took away from other matters.

No need to feel "sorry" for my situation Jeannine, everyone is juuuuusssst fine.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

PreviousNext

Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron