More moved solid waste

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Postby Mark Fitzgerald » Tue Feb 24, 2004 12:50 pm

I didn't forget Rick, but Muriel and Russ were at a much different point in their lives and didn't need an advocate. My personal nickname for Muriel is "Nails". :D
Mark Fitzgerald
 

Postby RBarnes » Tue Feb 24, 2004 2:37 pm

Mark Fitzgerald wrote:I didn't forget Rick, but Muriel and Russ were at a much different point in their lives and didn't need an advocate. My personal nickname for Muriel is "Nails". :D


Ah, I misunderstood the point you were trying to make then.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby RBarnes » Tue Feb 24, 2004 2:39 pm

RBarnes wrote:What's even worse is they [the local haulers] were offered the option to divide up the town among themselves and they would be the ones providing curbside. They would have increased business and made out from such an option but instead they turned to the town and said they could NEVER take the trash directly out of town since it would be too expensive.


One point I missed here is that by splitting up the town they would have also been able to keep their businesses focused on house to house to house rather then skipping around all over town. This would have saved them time and money by being able to run a more efficient streamlined business.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Muriel Lortie » Tue Feb 24, 2004 6:39 pm

RBarnes wrote:
RBarnes wrote:What's even worse is they [the local haulers] were offered the option to divide up the town among themselves and they would be the ones providing curbside. They would have increased business and made out from such an option but instead they turned to the town and said they could NEVER take the trash directly out of town since it would be too expensive.


One point I missed here is that by splitting up the town they would have also been able to keep their businesses focused on house to house to house rather then skipping around all over town. This would have saved them time and money by being able to run a more efficient streamlined business.


Rick,
They had the opportunity to bid on town wide curbside and they chose not to. Their reasoning was they could not get bonded and it was out of their league.
Muriel Lortie
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:23 am

Postby Muriel Lortie » Tue Feb 24, 2004 8:43 pm

Dennis King wrote:Mark,

Thanks for your respectful reply.
You make some good points about the debate last year. As I said, the invective only hurt a bad situation but it is history and we need to move on with our future.

The $400,000 in savings was a result of the 1 million in savings analysis done last year minus the $600,000 for mutiyear contract savings.

The savings came from the cost comparision over the two options, only I did not add in self haul and CS costs.

I agree with your revision of the analysis and would estimate the curbsiders pay an extra $1.20/week for the TS.

I think if you consider that the lion share of taxes is for education, then at least 1/3 of the taxpayers are paying 80 percent more than another 1/3 for the same service. This is an inequity too but one that comes in any town.

At the end of the day, I do not think this figure is so large as to clearly say the TS was a mistake, however, I certainly felt better about the TS when even the CS homeowners and condo owners would be getting some savings.

We could quibble over the numbers but I think they are "close enough for government work".

The current curbsiders are paying more for their contracts (bound to happen when the $40/ton tipping fee went up) plus a little more than a dollar a week to subsidize the TS.

Your point on the tax deductability was also a good one that never made it into the debate last year.

I think we need to make sure our leaders are listening as well as acting upon the needs of the people. This debate was perceived as a few people trying to get the TS off their road at all costs. The attacks and invective turned people off.

If a simple analysis with CS current contracts and without them was presented, then I believe the voters would have been able to make a more informed decision based upon where they stood on the issue.

Had the BOS agreed to this, then I believe the CS supporters would at least feel they had a shot.

I should also point out that now the haulers are out of town, I believe they were more in support of stopping a town wide curbside rather than for promoting the TS for the town. Sorry if that is cynical, but upon sober reflection, it appears to be the case.

Their businesses are doing well and they would be out of business if we went with CS. Still, many people like the individual service and I have always supported competiton so maybe it is not as bad as it sounds.

I do hope we can move on from the quibbling over numbers and move to other town issues.

Dennis


Dennis,
I agree we do need to move on to the future. The past should also be a reminder that the people we elect be honest, forthright and not self-serving. Beside Tony Holevas, David McCray spoke for us with the truth.

Seems you are still in tune with the local haulers. They supported the TS and said they would still use it no matter the cost. Why do you still support them when they turned tail and ran?

The only way we can stop quibbling is with open and honest government before the people.
Muriel Lortie
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:23 am

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:33 am

Muriel Lortie wrote:Seems you are still in tune with the local haulers. They supported the TS and said they would still use it no matter the cost. Why do you still support them when they turned tail and ran?


That seems to be the million-dollar question Muriel. The local haulers pushed the town to go with the station. They stood before the town claiming all these savings (which much of which was based on the revenue they supplied in tipping fees), they claimed they would support it regardless of the cost since it would be far too expensive to take trash directly out of town, they even claimed they wouldn't be able to take trash out of town for other reasons.

And now here we are... They take trash directly out of town because it's cheaper and we are stuck paying for an expensive middleman that services less then 1/3 of the town. So where do we go from here? Do you continue to support the haulers even after they openly mislead people?
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby The Purple Parrot » Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:58 am

The 3 local haulers, Houle, Mercier, and Buckley, were only interested in keeping their jobs. By having the town spend millions on a transfer station, they have job security. If curbside was chosen, the 3 local haulers would have been looking for new jobs.
The townspeople got hoodwinked, with the blessing of the former majority of the Board Of Selectmen
CARR, PELLIGRINO, L'HEUREUX, AND GAGNON.
At least the big haulers, BFI and Waste Management said they would take the trash to their own landfills if the tipping fee went above a certain dollar figure.
The town will most likely have to revisit the transfer station operation after 1 full year of operation.
:roll:
The Purple Parrot
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2003 11:00 am

Postby RBarnes » Wed Feb 25, 2004 9:35 am

The Purple Parrot wrote:The 3 local haulers, Houle, Mercier, and Buckley, were only interested in keeping their jobs. By having the town spend millions on a transfer station, they have job security. If curbside was chosen, the 3 local haulers would have been looking for new jobs.


They were offered the option to give a quote for curbside and they themselves could have been the ones providing curbside for the entire town. They said they couldn't take the trash out of town (which they are currently doing) so they didn't even try to make any offer which would have INCREASED their business and given them even more security.

As it is with the station the town can still at any time vote to go with a cheaper trash option and they'll be in the same boat as if the station failed only the town has now tossed away millions they could have otherwise saved.

The Purple Parrot wrote:The townspeople got hoodwinked, with the blessing of the former majority of the Board Of Selectmen
CARR, PELLIGRINO, L'HEUREUX, AND GAGNON.


Not just with the blessing but with the help of. Remember the town counted on the BOS to give them the facts so they would know which way they would vote. Instead we learned that facts and information were omitted from the public view or misrepresented.
User avatar
RBarnes
 
Posts: 6852
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 1:21 pm
Location: Merrimack

Postby Muriel Lortie » Wed Feb 25, 2004 5:28 pm

Rick,
I really thought it would have taken much longer for the truth to be known.

Should Nancy, Tony P., Norm C and Fran choose to run for public office this time around, I will not hesitate to remind the townspeople of their deceit in more ways than one.

Gizzel,
I agree, LR deserves town water. The landfill is unlined and it's only a matter of time chemicals will seep through and pollute neighboring wells.
Muriel Lortie
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:23 am

Previous

Return to Solid Waste, Landfill & Recycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron