Warrant Article Q&A: Curbside Pickup

It's safe to say the most contentious issue on the town side of Salem Town Meeting season has been the proposal

On March 13, voters will be asked to vote yes or no on . Then at the second deliberative session on March 17, Article 28 asks voters to raise $172,000 in the 2012 budget for the first half year of the contract with hauler E.L. Harvey and Sons of Westborough, Mass.

Members of the Municipal Solid Waste Committee have stated publicly

Salem Patch e-mailed a series of questions about curbside pickup to David Kincman, a member of the Municipal Solid Waste Committee in support of the plan, and Fred Leccese, the administrator of the Vote NoCurbside Facebook page.

What follows are the direct responses to the questions we Kincman to the questions. After that will be a portion of the e-mail responses we received from Leccese.

Q: Please state your case about why voters should vote for or against curbside pickup.

Kincman: Voters of Salem should vote “YES” to CURBSIDE” because it is the least intrusive, long term, sustainable, cost-effective method of handling solid wastein the Town of Salem. Increasing recycling is only one of the issues that the committee had to look at. We also had to look at what services for solid waste disposal the Town of Salem currently provides and how they are used by the residents.

Currently, 48 percent of the residents of Salem already have private curbside pickup. The committee felt the transfer station is an asset to the community, especially the convenience of being able to drop off yard waste, appliances, residential C&D, electronics, waste oil, and scrap metal. Salem has been able to provide that convenience to its residents for little ($5/CRT) or no additional cost while most towns have a fee system for all of those items.

In order to continue to provide all of those conveniences there will be a need to limit the hours of operation of the transfer station to only two days a week (Wednesdays, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and Saturdays, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m.). Additionally, you will be provided with two, 96 gallon totes, one to be used for trash and one to be used for recyclables. Your trash will be collected at the curb weekly, while your recyclables will be collected every other week.

Although the hours of the transfer station will be reduced, you will no longer have the need to go there regularly to dispose of your trash or recyclables. No more loading your car or truck will smelly, insect-infested trash.

Q: What in your opinion are some of the biggest misconceptions out there about the curbside plan and please state what you believe to be true about these misconceptions.

Kincman: Personally, I believe there are many more misrepresentations about the “curbside” plan than there are misconceptions. But ultimately, I believe the voters of Salem will be able to filter this information and make the best decision for them and the Town of Salem.

Some of the misconceptions are:

1) The misconception is that some residents believe that the $10 transfer station permits fee is what funds solid waste (trash, recyclables, yard waste, scrap metal…) disposal in the Town of Salem. In reality, we all pay a lot more than that to operate the transfer station. A house in Salem assessed at $275,000 (current median assessed value according to the town assessing department), is paying an additional $91 per year in taxes to run the transfer station as it operates today. If the “curbside” plan passes, the cost will be the $91 per year plus an additional $33 per yearr for that same $275,000 home.

2) There is a misconception because the transfer station will only be open
two days a week; residents believe there will be long lines. I was at the transfer station after Christmas (traditionally a busy time) and the lines were out onto Shannon Road.

As I waited in line, there were less than five people who went to drop off anything besides trash or recyclables. Have you ever seen a long line waiting to drop off scrap metal, electronics, C&D? Yes, I can see there could be a potential problem in the spring and fall with the need to drop off yard waste. If that happens, then we will extend the hours for yard waste in the spring and fall (most likely at no cost to tax payers).

3) The misconception is a belief that animals will be getting into their trash. Animals are creatures of habit and will look for a consistent food source. Putting out your trash once a week, in a secure trash tote, does not qualify as a consistent food source. Where do you store your trash now?

4) The misconception is that residents do not have to recycle if they do not want to. The Town of Salem has had mandatory recycling ordinance for many years now, well before the Solid Waste Committee was formed.

(It amazes me that the State of New Hampshire, which is renowned for its environmental beauty, does not have an environmental policy thatincludes a mandatory recycling policy.)

5) The misconception is that some believe going to “curbside” will make the town messier. Currently, the DPW picks up between 5 to 6 tons of trash on our roadsides. The private trash haulers have no standard method of curbside pickup. I have seen some residents leave a pile of trash at the end of their driveway for pickup.

This will be unacceptable with our “curbside” plan. All trash will be required to be in the supplied totes and the covers to be closed. These totes are designed to withstand the weather. It is a much better method than what is currently used by 48 percent of the residents in town.

6) People believe we have unsatisfactory service that we are stuck with E.L. Harvey for five years. As with any contract, there are performance clauses. If problems do arise and they are not addressed in a timely fashion by E.L. Harvey the contract can be terminated with no penalties.

7) The misconception is how will the elderly or disabled wheel a 96 gallon tote to the end of their driveway? How are these people disposing of their trash now? If the 96 gallon tote is too big for a resident to handle, they will be able to request a smaller 64 gallon tote that should be easier to maneuver.

Q. Will the town ultimately save money during the course of the five year contract with E.L. Harvey? Why or why not?

Kincman: The residents of Salem will save at least $600,000 per year overall.

The committee and I will be the first to say that the Town of Salem will not save money during the five-year contact with E.L. Harvey. The town operating budget will increase and we have stated that, but with what the town spends and what residents spend for private trash pickup, we currently spend over $2.2 million on solid waste disposal.

This is another example where an opponent of curbside misrepresents my ad from the previous week. The opponent clearly stated this week, that I said that "the current operating budget for the Salem Transfer Station is $2.2 million dollars per year" which in fact, I said that “If Salem keeps its currents ystem in place at the transfer station, the residents of Salem will be spending approximately $2.2 million dollars per year on solid waste disposal.”

How did I come up with that number of $2.2 million?

• The transfer station operating costs were $1.1 million for 2011. The proposed budget for 2012 is just over $1 million dollars.

• 48 percent of the residents currently have private curbside pick up. Opponents agreed with that figure.

• The cost range for private curbside pick up is $240 plus a fuel charge to over $500 per year. Opponents state many pay $240 per year.

• I used the number of 8,500 households and multiplied that by .48 andc ame up with 4,080 residents who have private curbside pickup.

• 4080 multiplied by an average cost of $300 per year came to over $1.2 million dollars Salem residents are spending for private curbside pickup.

• Total dollars spent on solid waste disposal by the residents of Salem is over $2.3 million. You can see I was very conservative in my numbers.

• The cost of the E.L Harvey contract I rounded up to $1.6 million. The bottom line is, overall the residents of Salem will end up with a $600,000 savings if the “curbside” plan passes.

Q: What, in fact, is the town's recycling rate? How would it improve with curbside pickup, or can we do better with the current system?

Kincman: The overall recycling rate for the residents of Salem in 2011 was 18.3 percent. Some confusion arose when we explained the difference in recycling rates between the residents who use private curbside pickup and residents who bring their trash to the transfer station on their own.

Currently, residents who bring their trash directly to the transfer station have a recycling rate of 12 percent. The residents who do have curbside pickup are recycling at a rate of 24 percent.

Just with that information alone, residents with curbside pick up have double the recycling. And yes, the towns recycling rate has improved in the past few years. Part of the reason for that increase has been the enforcement of Salem’s mandatory recycling ordinance (has been around since the 90s) with the private curbside haulers.

When the committee was reviewing method to increase recycling, we consistently were told two things, one make it easier, and two, make it more costly for those who do not recycle. The “curbside’ plan will do both. The “curbside” plan will encourage recycling by limiting residents to one 96 gallon tote for trash. Residents will be able to get an additional tote for trash, but there will be a cost.

There will be a one time cost of $60 for the extra tote and $10 per month for the pickup of the extra tote each week. People will think twice before throwing recyclables in the trash if it is going to cost more. There are examples of the 96 gallon totes at Town Hall. 96 gallons is a LOT of trash!

Can the current system be better? If we leave it alone, no, can we make it better, yes, but those changes that would need to be made would have a cost and loss of choice also. 

Any method to encourage people to change their habits and increase their recycling is going to have a cost and loss of some choices we currently enjoy. These changes are necessary to provide the Town of Salem with a long-term, sustainable, and cost effective solution for now and the future. After more than two years investigating the issue of solid waste and the needs of Salem residents, the committee has come up with the “curbside” plan as the least intrusive method to provide that solution for the residents of Salem.

Q. Is there anything else on this subject that you believe voters should know?

Kincman: No matter if you vote “YES” or “NO” for the “curbside” plan, hopefully the residents of Salem have become aware of the need to recycle. Any long term and sustainable solution needs to include an increase in the recycling rate. If there is one thing that we can be certain of, it is the cost of disposing trash is only going to increase. Currently it cost the Town of Salem almost $87 per ton to dispose of trash (9,565.93 tons in 2011) and only $27 per ton to dispose of recyclables (2,141.78 tons in 2011).

Any change is hard, but sometimes it is just the right thing to do. Once you begin to recycle, it becomes second nature and we all will enjoy the savings.

If residents have any questions about the “Curbside” plan, they can email yes4curbside@gmail.com and we will do our best to get you an answer.

                                                    *****

(Editor's note: Patch sent the same questions to Mr. Leccese and what follows is an excerpt of his response. He also stated his answers to our questions could mostly be found in his writings for the Vote NoCurbside Facebook page.)

Leccese: This proposal is not in the best interest of the town. The Waste Committee clearly did not do their homework on this issue and their numbers and "facts" continue to change. 

In addition, many of the "facts" they have led the taxpayers to believe are in direct conflict with the RFP which is available online. The Transfer Station has been consistently lied about as far as budgets. The town budget clearly shows that the Transfer Station actually saved money over the course of the past few years and the recycling rate has risen over the past three years (a fact which has been blatantly lied about by the Committee). 

The Waste Committee would have us believe that this initiative would save money, but by their own numbers we'll spend an additional $500,000 per year on this and the amount they've claimed we'd pay in added taxes will not cover the costs that the Town will be required to spend. 

Even further, a little investigation clearly shows that there's no possibility Harvey will stick with these numbers and there are a good deal of ways they'll be able to add fines/fees to the RFP as the Waste Committee made several serious errors in the RFP itself.