Non-Binding Referendum For November Ballot Tabled By Council Tuesday Night

For now, trash collection will remain status quo in Galloway Township.

The township council voted 6-1 Tuesday night to table a resolution calling for a non-binding referendum to be placed on November’s ballot concerning trash collection within the township. The one vote against tabling the resolution came from the council’s lone Democrat, Jim Gorman.

The proposed question would have read as follows: Should the Township of Galloway contract with a private company for trash and recycling collection services for all residential properties in the Township of Galloway?

The non-binding referendum would have gauged the residents’ thoughts on the township establishing a relationship with a trash and recycling service provider.

Gorman issued a statement concerning the vote Wednesday morning.

"I was disappointed with last night's vote," Gorman said. "This was a nonbinding referendum to get input from our residents. There are many ways this could be done from going out to bid, such as an inter-local agreement with the ACUA. Also, residents should have had the opportunity to contact their representatives and voice their opinion on this issue.

“To say some residents should vote and not others is a weak argument at best. Should people without children in schools not vote or renters not vote? That was the message Galloway council was sending to our citizens. I hope it will not be another twenty-five years until something is done.”

Currently, residents are responsible for the disposal of their own garbage, including which company they would like to dispose of their trash, and whether or not they even want to have a company dispose of their garbage.

Currently, about 2,000 of the roughly 9,700 Galloway households don’t have official trash pickup. Some residents take the trash to the dumps themselves.

There were many issues to be considered when it came to the referendum. Uniform trash pickup from one company, that would be the lowest bidder, would mean lower cost for trash pickup for some residents, but higher costs for others.

"Some seniors don't generate that much trash, but they would still have to pay as much as everyone else," Deputy Mayor Don Purdy said.

Some residents expressed concern about having to pick up the bill for others who were unable to pay their own.

“I’m uncomfortable with the township being responsible for the bills,” resident Anna Jezycki said. “If we get a deadbeat, I have to pick up the costs. Right now, if I don’t pay my bill, they just won’t pick up my trash and that’ll be the end of it. I don’t want the responsibility of what I do to fall on someone else.”

Condo associations and businesses would be able to opt out of the service, but the other residents wouldn’t have that luxury. This raised concerns that residents who live in condos would vote on a referendum that would ultimately have no impact on them.

“This is just to get something out there,” Gorman said as the council debated the various factors. “I’d like to let the people decide.”

“This is something we’ve been working on for a year,” Councilman Dennis Kleiner said. “Residents say they would like uniform trash pickup.“

However, Kleiner went on to say that because “the same people come to the meetings” time and time again, the council doesn’t get a good pulse of what it is the people of the township want.

“It’s a non-binding referendum, so if it comes back 50-50, that doesn’t really say anything, but if it comes back overwhelmingly, the people are saying what they want.”

And because the referendum would’ve been non-binding, the council would’ve been able to get a feel for what the township residents wanted before it acted.

The council got a small gauge Tuesday night when it invited public comment on the matter during its debate.

“You’re going about this the wrong way,” resident Richard Price said. “I went to another hauler myself to see if I could reduce my costs, and they brought it down by half. Let people decide for themselves what haulers they want to use.”

Price wanted the council to publicize how much each of the haulers cost and allow each individual resident to decide what they want to do.

Pastor Tom Douglass of the Highland Community Church took it a step further.

“I thought the role of government was supposed to be to take care of police and roads and things that we can’t do for ourselves,” Douglass said. “We can do this, so what on Earth are you doing this for?”

Deputy Director of Public Works Division Community Services Beth Stasuk also spoke during the public comment portion, suggesting the question be put on the ballot so it can be laid to rest.

“As a public employee, I know everywhere we go, we’re asked about trash pickup,” Stasuk said. “Why not just put it on the ballot, and then you won’t have to talk about it for the next six years.”

The council discussed adding it as a question during next spring’s primary elections, but Solicitor Mike Blee said referendums weren’t allowed on primary ballots.

There was also no cost in having the referendum added to this November’s general election ballot.

However, in the end, the matter was tabled in order to be sent back to the infrastructure committee for discussion.

The next council meeting is Aug. 23, 77 days before election day.

The deadline for submission of municipal and county public questions to the county clerk's office to be placed on November's ballot is Aug. 19.