Recycling, PAYT, and Tipping Fees

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Postby Norman Phillips » Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:02 pm

uscitizen03054 wrote:Norm, you are confusing me! The following statement is the culprit.

THEREFORE THERE IS NO REASON IN KINGDOM COME WHY YOU HAVE ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR STATING THAT YOU SHOULD GET IT AS A FREE BENNIE ON YOUR TAX BILL.


If you pay for SW disposal in your tax bill how is it free?


The claim made was ( emphasis added )
The least they can do is give me a little bang for my buck and take a very small portion of this and dispose of the citizens of Merrimacks trash.


Ten percent is not a "very small portion".
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Norman Phillips » Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:29 pm

DA
I do know at the time I responded to those figures saying that it basically comes down to a matter of choice because the figures of yours were so close.


Except that curbside took your trash away from your curb, while the transfer station scenario required you to take your trash to the station.

And for people who contracted with private haulers, the saving with CS would have taken care of the cost of the library and school bonds. So if you made the quoted statement, it was not true for that 2/3 of the population who paid to have their trash taken to the landfill or transfer station.
BUT I LOUDLY ADMIT THAT IS ALL WATER OVER THE DAM.

We have a transfer station!!! :D :D :D :D
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby RBarnes » Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:24 pm

uscitizen03054 wrote:If you pay for SW disposal in your tax bill how is it free?


You hit the nail on the head there US!
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:55 pm

uscitizen,

You are correct in that if PAYT is instituted your taxes for solid waste will be the big doughnut. Your costs are "in the bag", so to speak.
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby Norman Phillips » Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:25 am

Here is a short ( and amusing! ) NYT article on the travails of recycling in New York City. Presumably our ability to communicate with residents in Merrimack is much stronger and effective. And I do not think that the domestic strife described in the highlighted paragraph would happen here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/nyreg ... cycle.html

Sorting Refuse Would Be a Snap if Only They Could Sort the Rules
By ANDY NEWMAN



t seems that you can't please anyone in New York City. People complained for years about having to recycle their trash. Then they complained when Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg canceled most recycling to save the city money. And they positively howled in confusion when he restored some recycling but cut collections to every other week.
So it should not be surprising that many New Yorkers greeted the news that full weekly recycling of glass, plastic, metal and paper would resume in four weeks less than enthusiastically.

"Now we're going to have to worry about the glass?" Mary Owens, the superintendent of an apartment building overlooking Woodlawn Cemetery in the Bronx, said yesterday. "The people in the building won't recycle glass unless a miracle happens."

City officials say the new schedule, beginning April 1, should clear up any confusion that crept in as the city lurched in recent years from one recycling regimen to the next. But the fact is that many New Yorkers never quite got the hang of it to begin with. A Marist College poll in 2001 - before the gutting of the recycling program - found most New Yorkers scoring below 50 percent on a pop quiz about whether 12 common household items could be recycled. (Only 3 out of 918 respondents got all 12 answers right.)

A partial tour of the city yesterday found that even in two community districts, one encompassing much of brownstone Brooklyn and one in the northeast Bronx - where recycling participation was once high but fell by more than a third during the dark years - confusion was still prevalent.
"It's still very unclear in my mind," said Jon Naiman, 38, a photographer in Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn. "I don't see other households are getting it either. My impression is I'm a fairly attuned person and I can't figure it out."

For example, Mr. Naiman said, "I don't think you're supposed to mix cardboard and paper." In fact, you can.

"And,'' he asked, "what about laundry detergent jugs? Are they recyclable?" Indeed they are, as are all narrow-necked plastic bottles with the little "1" or "2" inside the triangular recycling logo at the base.
In Woodlawn in the Bronx, Anne Marie Weyrauch, it turns out, had the rules wrong. "Now glass is going in with the regular garbage?" she asked. No, she was told, glass will now be recycled.
"That's funny," said Ms. Weyrauch, 33. "I just left the glass in the clear bag today and put it out to be recycled."

Ms. Weyrauch is no slouch when it comes to dealing with bureaucracy. She works for a car dealership and said she had no problem navigating the complexities of obtaining registrations and license plates for customers' cars. But there is something about recycling policies that seems to short-circuit some people's brains. "I remember they posted signs that they're not recycling something," she said. "But I forgot what it is."

For the record, here are some things that may be recycled: pizza boxes, envelopes with windows, aerosol cans and toasters.
Here are some things that may not be recycled: plastic shopping bags, clamshell deli containers, mirrors and light bulbs.
The city will be sending households a flier explaining all this in the coming weeks. Don't recycle it.

What will it take to get people to toe the line on recycling? Corporal punishment, or the threat thereof, was cited by several subjects. Ms. Owens in the Bronx said she recycled assiduously because her husband hits her in the head if she doesn't.

In Park Slope, Brooklyn, Joe Taverney, 28, recalled that not long ago, "I put out some glass, but my landlord threatened me and then I remembered."

Philip Ameduri, a landlord of two buildings in Carroll Gardens, said his tenants seldom slipped up. "If I see something wrong, I tell them how to do it," Mr. Ameduri said. "It's my way or the highway."
Mr. Ameduri, retired from a job on Wall Street, had no patience with recycling know-nothings. "If you look at the pictures on the sign, it's not hard," he said, adding that his motto, "When in doubt, recycle it," had never steered him wrong.

Then there are parts of the city where the latest developments in the recycling policy are likely to be just as widely ignored as previous ones.
"I don't do it," said Anna Anglero, 44, who lives in the Red Hook West city housing complex in Brooklyn. "We have the incinerators right there so I just throw everything in it."

Some New Yorkers rejoiced to hear of recycling's return.
"That's excellent," said William Imboden, 42, a television producer in Park Slope. "We've been up to our eyeballs in recycling, and when the snows came they missed us and we had stuff all over the stoop."
"And it smells," chimed in his wife, Fiona Imboden, 38.
"It costs money, but it seems like a cost worth paying," Mr. Imboden said.
"We have to be environmentally conscious," Ms. Imboden added.
But even some steadfast recycling supporters harbored doubts.
"How long is this going to last, six months?" asked Greg Grogan, the superintendent of an apartment building on Grand Concourse in the Bronx. "He should make a law and stick with it."
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Norman Phillips » Sat Feb 12, 2005 11:06 am

This mandatory approach would probably not be acceptable in Merrimack. In our land-fill days, about 1000 tons of material was recycled every year that would otherwise have gone into the landfill. A VERY rough guess is that this is about 20% of the weight of material brought by the self-haulers.

I find it of interest in its showing how much the recycling ethos varies from place to place. Our new Town Manager, Mr. Tieperman, comes to us from Connecticut, mentioned in the article as having state-wide recycling mandates.

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=7106


Seattle Mandates Recycling

February 10, 2005 — By Elizabeth M. Gillespie, Associated Press

SEATTLE — Garbage hauler Frank Treto quickly spots enough junk mail and cardboard to warrant whipping out a bright yellow warning tag, one of hundreds he's doled out since the city's mandatory recycling law took effect this year.

So far, no one's given him any grief. "Not yet," he said. "I'm looking forward to that. I'm going to see if I can get a bulletproof vest."

Recycling has been required for more than a decade in communities with progressive reputations, such as Madison, Wis., and several Northeastern states -- with varying degrees of success.

Seattle has had ample reason to brag since 1989, when it became one of the first cities in the country to start curbside pickup of newspaper, cardboard, aluminum cans, glass bottles and office paper. But in recent years, its recycling rate has dipped below 40 percent, down from a peak of 44 percent in 1995.

Most cities would probably envy that rate, well above the national average of about 27 percent, according to the State of Garbage in America, a report published last year by the recycling journal Biocycle. But it's far from Seattle's goal of 60 percent by the end of the decade.

So the City Council passed a mandatory recycling law that took effect Jan. 1, but penalties won't be enforced until next year.

Starting in 2006, people in single-family homes won't get their trash picked up if they dump "significant amounts" of recyclables in their trash, defined by the city as more than 10 percent by volume. Owners of apartments, condominiums and businesses will face $50 fines.

So far, city officials say few people have complained. Most calls have come from people wondering how to comply with the new standards.

"When you tell them what the story is, they say, 'Oh, OK,'" said Tim Croll, community services director for Seattle Public Utilities, which runs the city's garbage and recycling systems.

The city has budgeted $1.5 million for a three-year education campaign that began last year and includes mailers, how-to kits, a recycling hot line and friendly warning tags that open with "Why waste a good thing?"

In Madison, Wis., a liberal college town that embraced recycling enthusiastically when it began in 1991, a fine has never been imposed.

"Seventy percent of the population is going to walk across a bed of hot coals to recycle a bottle. They just do that. They believe in it," said George Dreckmann, Madison's recycling coordinator. More than 90 percent follow the law, and Dreckmann said it doesn't make sense economically or practically to go after the few violators.

Recycling has been mandatory in Connecticut since 1991. Requirements vary from city to city, and enforcement has been the biggest challenge, said Judy Beleval, an environmental analyst with the state's Department of Environmental Protection.

"Some towns are good at it. Some towns are not so good at it," Beleval said. "In the beginning, most towns had a recycling coordinator. Over the years, because of budget cuts, that became the job of someone who was also doing 10 other things."

Frank Gagliardo oversees recycling enforcement -- in 169 cities and towns, home to 3.5 million people -- for the Connecticut agency. "We sort of have to pick and choose our battles," he said.

Last summer, Pittsburgh started fining residents who weren't complying with a mandatory recycling law enacted in 1988 for large communities in Pennsylvania. As of late January, the city had issued about 660 tickets at $62.50 a pop. So far, no one's been slapped with a second fine, a whopping $500.

"Every time someone calls and complains about the citation, they say, 'Well, I didn't think you were serious,'" said Guy Costa, Pittsburgh's public works director. "Now they're beginning to take us more seriously."
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Jeannine Stergios » Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:37 pm

Norm

Seattle Mandates Recycling


I am not in favor of ANYTHING done in Seattle being put to use in Merrimack.
REPUBLICAN - BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE CAN BE ON WELFARE
Jeannine Stergios
 
Posts: 9306
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 6:36 pm
Location: Jessica Drive Merrimack

Postby Michael Pelletier » Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:23 am

The Myth and Cost of Recycling - by John D’Aloia Jr.

Recycling makes sense when the market place says it makes sense. In our society, the value of something is represented by the price assigned to it in the market place. When it costs more to recycle a material than it does to dispose of it, the market place is telling us that we are wasting our resources, in effect, we are sending our dollars down a rat hole. For government to do this with tax dollars tells us that government does not understand its fiduciary duty nor does it value the hard work of its citizens. It demonstrates the belief that taxpayers are but tax slaves, that The Guardians have first call on the fruits of their labor, able to hand out tax dollars to special interest groups for favored programs, no matter their value or nexus to why we have a government.

... click here for the rest of the article ...
User avatar
Michael Pelletier
 
Posts: 4219
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: 3 Woodbine Lane

Postby Norman Phillips » Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:40 am

Sir, your columnist has ignored a very serious matter, at least as far as the town of Merrimack is concerned. The cost of handling one ton of household trash---i.e. handling it at the transfer station, and exporting it out of town, is somewhat more than $100.

In previous years, about 1000 tons of material were recycled each year. That was trash that did not go into the landfill. As such, that delayed the activation of the transfer station operation, to the tune of a saving of about $100,000 per year. When added to the resale value of (then) about $35,000 per year, we get a nice saving of about $135,000 per year.
From that you would have to subtract most of the two person operational cost at the recycle building. My guess is that the net benefit is about $50,000 per year.

At the moment, the resale value is considerably higher than $35,000 per year, since iron and steel are in great demand. The net benefit might then be as high as $100,000 per year. But saving of export costs is important.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Michael Pelletier » Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:51 am

Norman Phillips wrote:Sir, your columnist has ignored a very serious matter, at least as far as the town of Merrimack is concerned. The cost of handling one ton of household trash---i.e. handling it at the transfer station, and exporting it out of town, is somewhat more than $100.


He didn't ignore it, he wrote that recycling makes sense when the market says it makes sense. Here in Merrimack, it sounds like it clearly does.

I wonder how much weight it could offset to get a few court-ordered community-service people to help sort out the recyclables on the tipping floor in Merrimack, rather than imposing a mandate?

I have to wonder, also, why the side of Buckley Disposal's truck says "Recycling For Your Future" when they dump cans and bottles on the tipping floor.
User avatar
Michael Pelletier
 
Posts: 4219
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: 3 Woodbine Lane

Postby Norman Phillips » Mon Feb 14, 2005 11:13 am

Michael Pelletier wrote: -----
I wonder how much weight it could offset to get a few court-ordered community-service people to help sort out the recyclables on the tipping floor in Merrimack, rather than imposing a mandate?
An interesting idea. The DPW would have to make an educated guess first of all, and decide just what recyclable material would be worthwhile to sort out.
I have to wonder, also, why the side of Buckley Disposal's truck says "Recycling For Your Future" when they dump cans and bottles on the tipping floor.


I posted that imposing a mandate would not be acceptable in Merrimack. I gather that you agree.

Buckley's logo has always puzzled me, too, ever since he and I were on opposite sides of the transfer station - curbside pickup controversy.

Perhaps you can telephone Buckley Disposal Service at 429-0060.

Or perhaps one of Buckley's residential customers has an explanation they could offer us.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Michael Pelletier » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:13 pm

Norman Phillips wrote:I posted that imposing a mandate would not be acceptable in Merrimack. I gather that you agree.

Yes indeed. I think government functions best when it operates by creating incentives, rather than imposing mandates and punishment.

The city of San Jose, California finally gave up on asking its million-plus residents to sort their own recyclables to get to the 50% statewide goal, instead mixing all recyclables into a single bin and then sorting it at a central facility.

I suspect that while some of us find recycling worth the hassle, perhaps having been instilled during our upbringing with some measure of the religious fervor to which Mr. D'Alioa refers, many others don't want to rummage through their discards like hungry raccoons.

The astounding assortment of categories at the transfer station probably doesn't help matters, either.
User avatar
Michael Pelletier
 
Posts: 4219
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: 3 Woodbine Lane

Postby Wayne » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:04 pm

Michael Pelletier wrote:I suspect that while some of us find recycling worth the hassle, perhaps having been instilled during our upbringing with some measure of the religious fervor to which Mr. D'Alioa refers, many others don't want to rummage through their discards like hungry raccoons.

It seems you're suggesting that personal accountability ends where inconvenience begins. Rummaging through a pile of waste would be as distasteful to me as it is to you, but separating out the items is pretty straightforward when done when the waste is produced. When throwing things out, bottles go in one bin, can's in another, paper in another, etc. Couldn't be much easier, except having to trudge the bins to the transfer station, rather than utilize the curbside recycling that we could have had.
Wayne
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:47 am
Location: Merrimack

Postby Michael Pelletier » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:14 pm

Wayne Johnson wrote:It seems you're suggesting that personal accountability ends where inconvenience begins. Rummaging through a pile of waste would be as distasteful to me as it is to you. But separating out the items is pretty straightforward when done when the waste is producted. When throwing things out, bottles go in one bin, can's in another, paper in another, etc. Couldn't be much easier, except having to trudge the bins to the transfer station, rather than utilize the curbside recycling that we could have had.


For some people, the balance between an individual's sense of their own personal accountability and acceptable level of inconvenience is different than it is for you and I, hence the plastic bottles and tin cans that wind up on the tipping floor.

We have two bins in a drawer in our kitchen, and another stack of nine bins in the garage to sort out the recyclables, which I do usually every Friday afternoon or so.

Someone older and more set in their ways might not find that to be a worthwhile way to spend any time on Friday afternoon.

When I visited my folks in Michigan a few weeks ago - I engaged in my usual habit of tossing bottles and soda cans in the recycle bin, but there's a 10 cent deposit on most such containers in Michigan, redeemable at the grocery store. Old habits are hard to break.
User avatar
Michael Pelletier
 
Posts: 4219
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: 3 Woodbine Lane

Previous

Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

cron