Farmhouse Curve Status???

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Postby Chuck Mower » Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:34 am

What does a Baptist revival have to do with the farmhouse curve?
Chuck Mower
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:36 am

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:45 am

Nothing Chuck. All we can hope is that this new found mutual respect extends beyond the forum to include hollering insults on public street corners while hiding pathetically behind a group of supporters for protection. All while the child of the person hollering the insults watches.

On a funnier note, you'll never guess what I received via e-mail this morning.......
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby RBarnes » Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:50 am

Chuck Mower wrote:What does a Baptist revival have to do with the farmhouse curve?


Exactly Chuck.

Ever notice any time the topic of the TS comes up and facts that could make it look bad come up the same group of posters do all they can to take the argument away from the facts.

Here's a recap of the FACTS...

Farmhouse curve is not going to be fixed until spring.

Not clear on what the towns plan in the interim will be but I'd assume it's going to be a flagman.

Very little discussion at all over other danger points along the trucking route such as the Bedford Rd Bridge and the Joppa Bedford intersection. The Bridge is just now coming up as a warrant article in the spring. No news as to whether or not that would include the intersection as well. For the record these points have no flagman, flashing light or anything.

Prices... TS is coming in at 2.36 million a year while curbside would have been 1.8 million.

Any other relevant facts mentioned in this thread that I may have missed?

Another issue that needs to be questioned but may be topic for a new thread is the issue surrounding the scale. According to the news our current scale does not meet standards. So when will the new scale be put in and how will we be weighing in the mean time?
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby uscitizen03054 » Thu Dec 11, 2003 11:19 am

Barnes, my feeling is the SW wars are over and it makes no sense to continue to bash Dennis. What does this gain us? We should now work towards solving other problems.
User avatar
uscitizen03054
 
Posts: 7544
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 11:31 am
Location: Merrimack, NH

Postby RBarnes » Thu Dec 11, 2003 11:46 am

uscitizen03054 wrote:Barnes, my feeling is the SW wars are over and it makes no sense to continue to bash Dennis.


I would not call anything I've done bashing. Dennis has put out incorrect numbers and I corrected him. He continues to put out incorrect numbers in light of the correction. If he was never corrected and didn’t know better then I'd say it was simply a matter of ignorance and ignorance can be cured but he has been told the correct numbers (and where those numbers actually come from) and yet he continues to spout otherwise. That would make his statements lies. That's not a bash; it’s simply the truth.

And as for it being over... as long as I have to hear the sounds of trucks on my little winding country road and worry if one of them will plow into me while I pull out of my driveway and as long as I’m paying more then I should AND have to waste time to haul my own trash it will never be over for me. Your welcome to just ignore me but I will continue to remind this town in every way I know how that they were sold the facility based on lies and it is directly impacting peoples lives. While that may not matter to you it does to others.

uscitizen03054 wrote:What does this gain us? We should now work towards solving other problems.


Problems have been listed and are current being discussed. You seem to want to focus on the massagers rather then the message.

Here's a list of a couple problems in case you missed them.

Road safety. The TS used HUGE trucks that cannot fit on little country roads. In 2002 the highway safety committee meet and recommended Bedford and Lawrence Roads be studied for safety if they are to be used as the trucking route to and from a TS. This study has NEVER BEEN DONE. They also pointed out three danger points, which they felt should be addressed BEFORE opening a TS on Lawrence road. NONE of the three will be addresses before it's opening and only one of the three is even in the works of being addresses.

Funding. We know now the tipping fee will be set at $110 per ton. Depending on which set of estimates you use for how many tons and from where the TS will be handling this may or may not cover the share of cost based on the percentage of haulers vs. self-haulers. That would mean it will either have to raise again in a couple months or the remainder will be put on the tax payers forcing them to subsidize local businesses that can't make it on their own.

These I see as the two biggest issues that we've been discussing. Feel free to add additional issues or post something of substances about these.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Norman Phillips » Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:44 pm

Rick, you wrote
Prices... TS is coming in at 2.36 million a year while curbside would have been 1.8 million.


( It should be 2.26, not 2.36 ) The TS amount in the operating budget has not yet passed through the Budget Committee. It is not likely to be raised!! :D :D :D

Mr. Levan has shown the BC that the difference between the 1.5 million promised last year and the above 2.36 for a TS is primarily due to the desire to program for 18,500 tons per year, instead of the 12.000 tons considered last January by the BOS.

The 1.8 million for a curbside program does not include the cost of running a drop-off site. It is primarily the scaled-up version of the 1.65 million Hudson contract, which included access to a drop-off site only 8 times per year.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Norman Phillips » Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:45 pm

Norman Phillips wrote:Rick, you wrote
Prices... TS is coming in at 2.36 million a year while curbside would have been 1.8 million.


( It should be 2.26, not 2.36 ) The TS amount in the operating budget has not yet passed through the Budget Committee. It is not likely to be raised!! :D :D :D

Mr. Levan has shown the BC that the difference between the 1.5 million promised last year and the above 2.26 for a TS is primarily due to the desire to program for 18,500 tons per year, instead of the 12.000 tons considered last January by the BOS.

The 1.8 million for a curbside program does not include the cost of running a drop-off site. It is primarily the scaled-up version of the 1.65 million Hudson contract, which included access to a drop-off site only 8 times per year.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby Norman Phillips » Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:47 pm

Superseded by the preceding post that includes a minor correction of my original short-lived post. Sorry.
Sincerely, Norm Phillips
Norman Phillips
 
Posts: 5329
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:48 am
Location: 18 Edward Lane, Merrimack NH

Postby RBarnes » Thu Dec 11, 2003 3:07 pm

Norman Phillips wrote:( It should be 2.26, not 2.36 ) The TS amount in the operating budget has not yet passed through the Budget Committee. It is not likely to be raised!! :D :D :D


Sorry, type-o on my part. It should have been 2.26. But regardless, lets hope it isn't raised.

Norman Phillips wrote:Mr. Levan has shown the BC that the difference between the 1.5 million promised last year and the above 2.36 for a TS is primarily due to the desire to program for 18,500 tons per year, instead of the 12.000 tons considered last January by the BOS.


So 6,500 tons of trash at a contracted cost of $90 a ton (as stated on the handout from the tipping fee public hearing) which comes out to be just over a half a million by my math would come out to be closer to 800,000 based on the towns calculations? Then answer me this, what is the bottom line cost for the TS... in other words saying the amount of trash were to drop to zero, we still have labor, building maintenance, I'm sure there's a minimum contract rate in the hauling and disposing contracts?

Norman Phillips wrote:The 1.8 million for a curbside program does not include the cost of running a drop-off site. It is primarily the scaled-up version of the 1.65 million Hudson contract, which included access to a drop-off site only 8 times per year.


Now Mark F. posted that it would. He stated the 1.6 was for the curbside and an additional .2 would be needed to run a drop off site.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Devils Advocate » Thu Dec 11, 2003 3:32 pm

DA,

It is one thing to hold a different opinion and to be attacked for it unfairly.

It is another thing entirely to "mock" people.

Dennis, perhaps you are right. but I assure you any mocking from me has only been initiated after the first arrow was slung many moons ago. I see the regulars, and you know who they are from way back in the old forum spewing the same old garbage, (No pun intended) and have little respect for them. I know their mission, and it has nothing to do with safety, children, the environment etc. It still and always has been get it out of my backyard, nothing less, nothing more. Dennis, if nothing else, we agree on somethings, and somethings we don't. As you know, I have never slung any arrows at you. To me you are one of the few level headed people on this forum and at town meeting. If you ever do decide to run for selectman you will have my vote.
Devils Advocate
 

Postby Nat Fairbanks » Fri Dec 12, 2003 12:42 pm

numerous posts deleted

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

Previous

Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron