Here’s the skinny on the Monday, November 10, Town Council Meeting
New elected Councilors Gerald MacPherson Sr. and David E. Webster sign the oath of office after being sworn in by Town Clerk Barbara Bennett.
Agenda:
Organizational
1. Elect Chairman- Jean Demetracopoulos was unanimously re-elected as Town Council Chair.
2. Adopt meeting rules-The Council unanimously voted to adopt meeting rules of Roberts Rules of Order and the Town Administrative Code.
3. Sign policy on Treasurer’s Disbursement Warrants for Employee Wages & Benefits-Passed unanimously.
4. Elect Chair and Treasurer of the Vaughan Fund-The Council voted in Gerald MacPherson Sr. as chair and David Burke as Treasurer of the Vaughan Fund.
Recess
6:45pm Public Hearing – Solid Waste Ordinance
The Council heard public comment on the proposed amendments to the solid waste ordinance. The amendments make changes to the the solid waste ordinance to reflect the new Pay as You Throw (PAYT) program. Changes spell out requirements for private contractors that are providing trash pickup within South Berwick, including new fees for using the transfer station. New rules will require private contractors to take all commercial and industrial waste to the MERC facility. The new rules also set forth the requirements for use of the official PAYT bags. The new rules also set forth penalties for failure to follow the ordinance, creating roadside litter, and creating a health hazard due to accumulation of waste in an unauthorized location.
Public comment was largely negative with questions asked about the potential negative effects on waste haulers, the cost for the bags and its affect of this expense on families, and how the new ordinance would effect small businesses and home occupations. The Council indicated that they would discuss the ordinance’s potential affect on waste haulers that only serve South Berwick and consider clarifying the language as it relates to small businesses and home occupations. The Council presented their rationale for the PAYT program as a way to create a user fee based system that would encourage people to recycle and that would result in a cut to the tax rate (this year the PAYT program resulted in a .17 cent reduction in the mil rate) through lower tipping fees at MERC and through increased revenues from the sale of recyclable commodities. They indicated that the estimates they made were conservative and based on other Towns’ experiences with PAYT. Once the PAYT has a track record they will be able to predict its financial impact for the 2009/2010 tax rate and town budget. The Town Manager said that the town report will clearly explain the costs and revenues of the PAYT and transfer station so citizens can understand the finanical impact of the program. No Council action was taken on the ordinance.
During the Manager’s Comments there was discussion about whether to winterize and close down the St. Michael’s church building for the winter rather than heat it. $17,000 had been budgeted for winter heating. Councilors expressed concern about what damage might occur if it is not heated but there was generally consensus that it should not be heated. The Council is waiting for the feasibility study to determine what would need to be done to make the building suitable for a library.
New Business
1. Take action on Safety Enhancement Grant for Public Works.-The Council unanimously accepted a $2000 grant to assist with the purchase of traffic safety signs that are required by state law.
2. Take action on donation to Fire Dept.-The Council unanimously accepted $1000 that will go toward the turnout gear for one firefighter. The donation is from a bequest from the estate of P. Monroe.
3. Take action on donation to the Police Dept.-The Council unanimously accepted $1000 that will go toward a new radio and a ballistic vest. The donation is from a bequest from the estate of P. Monroe.
4. Take action on donation to the library.-The Council unanimously accepted $500 that will go toward the new library. The donation is from a bequest from the estate of P. Monroe.
5. Take action appointment to SB Feasibility Study.-The Council unanimously voted to have Councilor Burke serve on a Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission Feasability Study group to look for solutions to relieve downtown traffic congestion.
Anon,
Your last post makes my point.
Knowing that single stream is more efficient, and the sheer unwillingness of anyone to give out the name of the bag provider and the bidding process….whatever….i’m getting curb pick up from WM.
I’m sorry. Having watched this town government and realizing that it is government by the few for the benefit of the few, i’m going to try to “opt out” as much as I can until there’s another election……or catastrophe that forces them to act in a manner beneficial to ALL, not just SOME.
Anonymous, This is from the minutes of the Town Council meeting (from the Town website) where the council voted to approve the contract for bags: On a motion by Mrs. Kareckas, seconded by Ms. Roberge, it was unanimously voted to approve the contract with Phoenix Recycling for the purchase of PAYT bags. I’m surprised that you have encountered “sheer unwillingness” of anyone to give out the name or details of the PAYT bag contract. In my experience the Town Council and the Interim Town Manager go out of their way to answer questions that come up during the public comment portion of the Council meetings.
molly, pleased to hear that they were forced to name the company at tne meeting. three direct questions to council members over the past month got nothing. also have yet to find out if it was open for bidding or just awarded.
and, maybe they go out of their way to answer your questions as the webmaster of the town’s one website, but frankly, most of the rest of us who are not “connected” are peasants. we don’t get answers, we get pursued lips and sighs at our “nit picking” as i believe one council member termed it.
Anon,
Your last post makes my point, again. I just don’t believe you.
tim, is that you?
I can see how people get pessimistic or angry. When you see something that could save the town more money and the council doesn’t give you a good reason to why they are not doing it it becomes maddening. When I said to the council when you don’t make 60,000 next year from bags what do you plan to do? they say we need to see what happens. They should have just said we will raise your taxes or increase bag cost. I must remind people that when a town charges you for something it very rarely goes away it usually goes up in a year or two. I remember my grandfather saying maine told people that the interstate highway tolls would go away once it was completed. I bet everybody knows it is only going up and up as cost continue to rise to fix it and update it. You think gas taxes will go down as we use less gas in the future, no it will rise and once we have more plug in hybrids the state of maine will tax electric usage when plugging in those cars. To get back to the point. When you work hard for your money and you see the town not do one cost cutting option but charge you more for another it becomes very upsetting. You know next year no matter the money made by bags you will get a tax increase for the town and school system.
Nicely put.
You betcha. Even more infuriating is the fact that they continually disregard alternatives, and almost without exception, choose the most costly or ultimately risky way to go. There seems to be absolutely no sense of fiduciary responsibility. None.
Okay, let’s look at the likelyhood of not generating $60,000 next year…
Quick estimate:
My family will throw out 2 bags a week at $1.50 per bag…that’s $3 per week…We will do it 50 times per year…that is $150 for from our family…
There are approx. 2000 households in town…so $150 x 2000….equals some basic math again… $300,000.
Even if half the households in town dump their garbage on their neighbors property or hire a commercial hauler the town will still generate $150,000…
Which seems like enough to purchase whatever equipment is needed for the single stream recycling. I wonder what any extra revenue generated will be used for.
all extra money will go into heating the empty church this winter.
Please remember that the PAYT program is only running for 6 months this fiscal year, and the revenue estimates are not based on a full year, but 6 months.
Any money over the estimated revenue could be used to offset transfer station costs next year.
Laughing. And I assume that it would also help pay for the full freight medical that all the town employees have.
What have we come to? When is sanity going to come into the equation here?
hey taxpayer this is me you dope!! see the name it spells TIM not anon. sorry to disappoint.
lets talk about using another name there mr.taxpayer! i have noticed a name that was using this blog daily,im sorry, hourly and now i havent seen his name for a little while now.
then taxpayer shows up,i wonder who it could be? huh.
tim, you are a piece or work
Ok Anonymous Please spell out why in exact terms why singe stream is any better than pay per bag I want to see hard figures and evidence that it is better than any thing else. I was at the dump two weeks ago throwing my two bags away and depositing a box of recyclables in the appropriate hoppers and in comes a truck with a trailer attached loaded to the hilt with garbage(maybe he hadn’t been to the dump in awhile ,maybe not) why should I pay the same as him. I think payt is a fare way to go.
this fairness idea is foolish to say. I don’t use the school system so I should pay no money to it? I mean I don’t use it why should I pay the same as someone who has 2 or 3 kids in the school. It works because we all pay a portion based on home and property value not on amount of time in buildings or riding busses. We all pay for the transfer station now and we should continue this without adding taxes, look for ways to cut taxes and we all benefit equally.
We use a tax/consumer fee combination payment system on many things: water, sewer, car registrations, boater registration, hunting licenses and more. In all of these instances we all pay for some of the basic infrastructure through our taxes (e.g. water treatment, sewer lines, road safety enforcement, public boat launches, game wardens,etc.) and then we pay more based on our use or consumption. That way people who use the service more, pay more. As far as schools go, even though I don’t have any children, I am happy to pay taxes toward good schools because it makes for a better community with higher property values, lower crime, and more educated people. I think that parents do end up paying way more for their children to go to school, since there are myriad other costs associated with getting a child through school that are not paid for through taxes.
I agree that PAYT and Single sort are two different things but I would think that the town would want to make recycling easier if they are going to make people want to recycle with PAYT. I also know from their website that ecomaine collects more stuff than our town currently does, so even more things could be recycled as opposed to thrown in a bag. As far as proof, I heard that ecomaine did a cost analysis for the town. They are a non-profit so if you ask for the informatin they have to give it to you. If you really want to see what the town might save by going to single stream, I would ask for the info.
I would have liked it better if the town said we are going to try to go to single stream and see if that gets us to are cost savings we need. Then if that could not do it either go to payt or raise taxes on everyone. Be smarter to cut cost to save the 60,000 for this half of the year.
Thanks Molly for answering my rebuttal to Peter.
I bet this paytnhas been beat to death now. We now know some don’t want to pay for bags and others have no problem paying. Since this is a republic are elected officals have decided and we will pay. I with others will pay and not like it but what the heck we all pay for things we don’t want in this government. The few of us that want change and less spending have to keep trying to convince the council to cut cost, but I am not to optimistic about it.
Peter you are right we all have to pay on things we don’t like. I run a business in town that is NOT connected to to town water or sewer but I still get charge a fee because the water line runs by my building.
And peter I also agree less spending is in order!
That was my whole point this payt is not about making people pay for what they use, it was to make money, instead single stream should have been tried first to see how that would have saved the town. Even if they said we need to sell these bags to pay for the 32,000 investment in equipment to get the single stream going I would be all for it. Considering the commitee said they would save close to 100,000 a year over what it is now costing the town to run the transfer station.
The town water and sewer is something that is wrong. If you don’t use it you should not have to pay for capitol inprovement bonds that they choose to take on. Again it is one of those things, need to rewrite those laws, but I bet if they did it would make the bills go up drasticly for those who do use it everyday and need too.
very simply, this is not a town that is run sensibly or fairly, or, frankly, even responsibly. at some point, the financial situation will become so critical that they will be forced to start making rational financial decisions, but we’re not there yet. I guess we’re going to have to see people start falling into tax default or a wave of foreclosures before the people benefiting from the town’s largesse to back off. I don’t know.
Clearly, the current wave of red ink isn’t waking anyone up yet. My only hope is that they don’t manage to dig the ditch much deeper before sanity takes over. By my calculations, every 100K added to the town’s debt and subsequent necessary increase in taxes will trigger one foreclosure.
Sick to think that this will happen due to the stubborness of town officials to admit the mistake with the Church, and to pay for the cadillac medical plan for town employees. Along with all the other nonsense going on. Sick.
These guys need to move to DefCon 4 on the financial belt tightening cause things aren’t going to get better for at least the next year. Have we seen them cut back on anything yet? ANYTHING????? For real, not just some cosmetics, or intended project deferred? No. No.
In fact, until public pressure grew intense they were planning cost of living and merit raises for town employees. And have they put the insurance out for bid?
I don’t know what it is going to take to make it sink in that this country is heading into a very intense recession, but we’re going to find out. And thanks to the “wisdom” of our town leaders, it is not going to be very comfortable in South Berwick.
Anon,
I got it…. You are KC!
If I am going to pay for bags I don’t really care what goes in them. They are MY bags. I’ll save time and effort by not having to recycle. I think PAYT is a great idea. Might cost a couple of dollars more per month, but it is well worth the lack of effort. I for one am quite sick of having to separate plastics and paper products. From now on it is in the bag, and into the hopper!! After all, they are MY bags.
taxpayer why dont you use your original name instead of this new one.stop worrying about who other people are.
i guees you really do have to know everything that is going on in this town!
anonimal,you got that right.coming from you i am sure i can take that as a compliment.thanks!!
If there where questions about the payt and anything else all of you like to ask the council or town what would they be? I figure instead of all the dome and gloom lets ask the questions and get anwsers, then ask more questions. I will ask the questions myself and report on the exact anwsers. Only then can we have a real constuctive conversation. We are not doomed in anyway, we will need to make changes but remember we are constantly and always changing. Lets put are heads together and the changes won’t all be for the worst.
Can someone explain to me how S Berwick is going to enforce this on private contractors? Are they getting together road blocks and stopping every garbage truck that enters or exits the town? Are they going to put a cop or transfer station employee at every corner to check for “non conforming” trash? If someone like a “mom & pop” business doesn’t have a permit, how are they going to know they are picking up trash in S Berwick and taking it somewhere else? Wouldn’t that require some Orwellian survelliance of the town? Or at least using law enforcement or other town employees to do something that really doesn’t benefit the citizens? Do we want our police force chasing “illegal trash movers” or protecting us from real crime?
And what if I bag my trash and take it to a relative’s house in another town – am I in violation? Guess I better not be carrying a litter bag in my car for the trash I generate there – I’ll be stopped at the border on 236 and kept from going home because I “transported” my trash and “dumped” it somewhere other than MERC!
And to be honest, the first I’d heard of this was as I went to vote and it the handouts were given to me as if it were a “done deal” so obviously there’s a hard sell going on. I just honestly think it’s unenforcable the way it is.
1) it is totally unenforceable
2) if they had competent legal counsel, they woud have been told this, and if any hauling company around here bothers to take them to court over it, the town will lose. at summary judgement…..which is a hearing held generally after the first round of paperwork….in other words, the town’s position is so untenable legally they wouldn’t even get to an actual trial or have a leg to stand on at an actual trial.
but what else is new?
Anon,
Go tilt at other windmills. The Town has gone on record as saying that if a hauling company picking up trash in SB goes to some other disposal facility than MERC, the Town has no interest and doesn’t care.
But shouldn’t the town have at lease some concern (and responsibility?) that its trash is being disposed of legally and safely -both for the public and for the environment?
Not in the private market. It’s a free market. If trash is managed through the Town system, yes. If not, it’s not the Town’s business.
Trash is legally a “commodity”, it’s a free market.
Taxpayer, I’m still confused – if the town doesn’t care if someone hauls the trash somewhere else then why do all the contractors need to sign up for permits and according to what I’m reading once they do that, they have to take it to MERC. So again, how do they enforce that? If they don’t care, then fine, everyone in town can pay a contractor to haul their trash somewhere else and then what’s the point of PAYT? It sounds to me that the town does not want trash to be a “commodity” but Town “property”.
Bill, contractors have to pay “tippng” fees no matter where they take it so there are systems in place to dispose of trash “legally”. As for environmental concerns – well, drive the roads leading to the dump and see how much trash falls off people’s cars. Should the town be concerned to pick that up? Most places have fines for littering, but even those are hardly enforced.
I don’t believe the motivation here is concern over trash being disposed of properly or legally or environmentally friendly. Most people have done the whole “recycling” thing already since it’s mandatory. PAYT is simply a way for the town to “reduce” our property taxes by “taxing” our trash!
Rhiannon,
Taking from previous posts:
The Town can regulate those who uses the town’s Transfer Station, and those that use the Town’s contract with MERC bringing waste from S. Berwick. It can’t impose regulations on waste that is managed outside that system, and at other facilities, such as through Waste Management. If waste goes to other facilities that have no contractual relationship with the Town; that’s “free trade”. Otherwise it’s called “flow control”, and it’ not legal.
Article II of the Ordinance – Flow control : Originally adopted in 1987. These provisions were in place to support the Town’s commitment AT THAT TIME to MERC. Subsequently almost 20 years ago, these types of “Flow Control” provisions were found unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court. They remain illegal.
In any event, even without amendment, the existing ARTICAL II is not attempted to be applied in Town. Waste Management, and maybe others, have been servicing my home for many years, taking the material to their landfill in Rochester, NH (quite legally).
The logic is: if the waste is not being managed by the Town, through Town contracts, the Town has no involvement, financial or otherwise. It’s as though the waste does not exist from the Town’s perspective.
People are free to contract with a service, as an individual with free market opportunities, that does not use Town facilities or contracts.
Thanks, Taxpayer, that makes more sense now.
But it still kind of makes me wonder how much the Town thinks this will help them financially. And I do have some concern that they are rolling this out at a time where people are struggling to make ends meet and heat their homes and put food on the table. Those are the people who can’t afford someone like Waste Management or possibly any other contract service and now they will have to pay for their trash at the transfer station. Granted, raising property taxes wouldn’t help those people either, but this just seems like a bit of a slap in the face on top of the already troubled economy. Just my opinion.
Depending on how big your family/household is, it may be cheaper for you to contract with a waste hauler than to pay for bags.
No matter how big the family/household is, “cheaper” is still more costly than “free”. At least that’s what I’ve been taught in every math class I’ve ever had…
Rhiannon, your trash disposal is not free. It is part of your tax bill. If you are good at recycling, you are likely tax subsidizing those who are not or choose not to. This year, the council reduced the municipal tax rate by 17 cents over what it would have been, had they not instituted PAYT for six months. It would have been a 34 cent reduction had they done it for the full year. The solid waste committee spent over a year looking at PAYT and reported back that it was equitable. People pay for what they throw away. it is not double taxation if that money offsets the transfer station expense amounts. If PAYT raised more money than the transfer station expenses, then it would be double taxation. People producing large amounts of trash have the option of contracting with a private hauler. They can still bring their recyclables to the transfer station at no cost. The town continues to have to accept the other wastes such as computers, refridgerators (white goods), florescent lights, construction debris, waste oil and coolant, etc. The town has charged for these items and will continue to do so – already a PAYT system. No one has complained that was not equitable. Every service provided by the town, county and school district has a cost. This cost is your tax bill. We will not have lower tax bills and higher services- especially as fixed costs increase for all of us. That is also basic math.
True, taxes do work that way, but it’s not always that way – and I’m sure the town will have a reason to increase taxes again to make up for the difference – like increased salaries for all their workers, that’s a fact of life and if the town doesn’t increase it’s revenue either the workers don’t get a pay increase or they cut some other service, or taxes go up – there’s only so many ways to squish that balloon.
If there are people who can afford private trash hauling and people who can’t, how is that “equitable”? If the town cannot tax trash hauled by someone like Waste Management, then those folks aren’t paying into the town at all for their trash that would be under PAYT – and that would probably be those folks who produce the large amounts. So those that produce the most trash probably will take their trash elsewhere (if they don’t already) – so their taxes have been lowered and they are not paying that money back in at the transfer station. And the money & trash are probably going out of state, not just out of town.
The other wastes you mention all have some type of “hazardous” label attached (i.e. freon in the refridgerators, mercury in the florescent lights, waste oil and coolant, etc) so the town would be in violation of state & federal law if it didn’t control that – and they are using those funds to pay fees to the the state and federal govt to handle and dispose of it. So no, I would not imagine there’d be much complaint over that – either pay for the hazardous waste you bring in or you pay higher taxes in fines to the state & federal government?
This is not “lower tax bills and higher services” this is the same service – just being taxed for differently. And the “large producers” will find a way to avoid paying the PAYT and all the smaller households will be left, literally, holding the bag.
If PAYT will not raise more money that transfer station expenses, then it is simply a shifting of taxation – and again, the larger producers will either pay the higher amounts and, assuming that they are businesses, will raise their prices, thus passing that higher cost onto whoever uses their services or purchases their products – or they will just have their trash hauled outside of the town, paying the town nothing for that service at all but getting their tax bills reduced like everyone else.
I realize that there are more people for this initiative so my few comments here will not ripple that ocean of acceptance. I do hope that in the long run, this is a good move for the town and it will save money or at least “break even” and my gloomy thoughts will not come to pass.
Rhiannon
Some ways your right some ways your wrong
I you had some of the large producers in town bring there garbage else where and some of the people who could afford it get dumpsters it would lower the transfer staion cost in some ways
less trash= less fuel to hall the waste and less tipping to merc to except the waste= savings.
It also = less waiting for me on a Sunday morning!