Jackson Selectmen
Public Hearing
October 25, 2012
Present: Jerry Dougherty IV, Chairman; Bob Thompson and John Allen, Selectmen
Visitors: Police Chief Karl Meyers, Officer Sean Cowland, Hank Benesh, Jerry Dougherty, III, Kathleen Dougherty, Norman Head
Chairman Dougherty called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and noted tonight’s Public Hearing is about the Bartlett-Jackson Transfer Station Agreement.
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:02 p.m. Chairman Dougherty thanked those in attendance for showing up and hopes there are many more watching this online. He would like to give a brief history of the contract and then open it up for questions and comments.
The new contract was signed in March 2011; in 2004 a contract from 1984 was discovered that had a different cost-share than what was happening; the Selectmen felt Jackson was overpaying and asked to begin negotiating with Bartlett to fix that. The towns eventually sat down and discussed the contract. At the time, the cost-share was basically 50/50 on capital expenses and 60/40 on operation expenses. When it was determined Jackson had two employees and Bartlett had one that was also felt not to be a fair split. In 2008 this was reviewed; Jackson wanted to go to the 1984 contract where all costs were based on equalized valuation; that would have been a 77/23 split at that time. Bartlett was agreeable to go back to something similar to the 1984 contract but not as it was written in ‘84;
for two years the two towns were negotiating how to share the costs with no progress.
Jackson asked the Court to rule on the validity of the 1984 contract and then Bartlett would no longer discuss the contract due to the court case. Bartlett did give Jackson the opportunity to negotiate something brand new and over the course of the next nine months the towns agreed to the new contract with a split of 75/25 for operating costs which is based closely on equalized valuation. Major capital expenses like the road or a new building would be shared at 50% and capital equipment will be shared 60/40.
Chairman Dougherty noted the idea behind agreeing to sharing expenses was that both towns recognized they would have 100% of the cost if they weren’t sharing so it is better to share the costs; it is fair and equitable. Regarding the split on capital equipment, Bartlett claims it’s not how the equipment gets used, Jackson would have to pay for it 100% without this partnership; Jackson clearly is not using the equipment as much as Bartlett does up there however it was in the best interest of both towns to negotiate a figure for this split.
Regarding the employees, due to the way insurance companies work the towns couldn’t form a cooperative with two towns having employees so all employees had to be employed by one town; Bartlett now employs all personnel. In the contract and discussion Jackson has as much say in employees as before. As of August 31, 2012 all employees are under the town of Bartlett; Jackson will owe Bartlett 25% of those costs which will be settled by December 15th of each year. There is an expected savings of somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000 per year; the towns will go back to March 1, 2011 for the cost-sharing. That step hasn’t been completed yet; Bartlett will pay Jackson some money on that.
This contract is valid for the next five years with negotiations set to being four years from now; if one of the towns’ revaluation swings out of whack the figures can be amended at any time by negotiation with the Selectmen of both towns; the way the town disposes of trash remains the same. Jackson has its own dumpster; Bartlett has its own dumpster; that is not a shared expense; it has never been a shared expense and it won’t be a shared expense moving forward. The change in cost-sharing on operating expenses is really the only change; this contract reflects the ability of both towns to sit down and plan for the Transfer Station; both long and short term; the towns will move forward positively.
Selectman Thompson is not aware of any other points to bring forward on the contract; the Selectmen also want to look at long range planning; there are things the Selectmen want to do differently or more efficiently at the Transfer Station and they have agreed to look at the Master Plan; to see if it is laid out efficiently regarding recycling and the dump store; the Selectmen will be looking at it from an operational standpoint; Selectman Thompson is looking forward to that kind of progress being made up there, too.
Chairman Dougherty asked if there were any questions or comments.
Jerry Dougherty has three questions:
1) How was the suit, brought by Jackson about the 1984 contract, decided?
2) In as much as each town’s tipping fees for household trash and construction debris are paid for by each town, what are the shared expenses?
3) How is the revenue side from recycling shared?
Chairman Dougherty responded as follows:
- Jackson withdrew the petition; the reasoning behind that was because the lawsuit was asking for clarification on the 1984 contract; Bartlett answered in a clear and concise way; the contract was never executed. By statute of limitation that contract would have expired in the mid-90s; the Board sought another opinion about this from Counselor Malia; there was no outcome change; it didn’t look good; Jackson was asking for clarification on a contract that never went into effect.
- The tipping fees are separate as always; Jackson used to have a better price but he’s not sure if that still is the case. Jackson pays around $126 per ton for tipping and trucking fees and those will remain the same; Jackson spent $24,000 last year. All the costs are shared except tipping fees for household trash; maintenance and labor is what is shared; the towns pay separately on insurance and for construction debris that is hauled off.
- The revenue from recycling goes into the joint bank account which has been building a lot because the towns couldn’t agree on spending it; now the towns are using that account for expenses; the $30,000 for the new roll-off truck came out of that account; paving, tires for the tractor, maintenance on the vehicles are all paid out of revenue from recyclables. Jackson’s share of the revenue reflects the 75/25 split; Jackson has paid for items coming out of the account equally.
Norman Head sees the problem with the equalized valuation issue but a five year contract seems very short. Chairman Dougherty noted it was Jackson not Bartlett that wanted that. The towns were going through negotiations around the cost-share and equalized valuation; Bartlett was going through revaluation and Jackson was concerned Bartlett’s valuation would go way up. It actually went down; the equalized valuation split was 77/23 before and now it is just under 76/24; it is close enough to the 75/25 split that was agreed upon. Chairman Dougherty noted that the way the communities are getting along regarding the Transfer Station he sees no issue renegotiating in five years.
Norman asked if there are any caveats; Chairman Dougherty noted there is one; if there is no new agreement the current one remains in place until one town decides to sever ties; that’s the same as in the 1984 contract and the RSA’s support this; if one town wants to back out it can but the other town can continue to use the property.
Norman noted he is not in the habit of visiting dumps however he went to Tuftonboro’s and it’s magnificent; it is well-organized; folks drive in undercover to dump household trash and they go out a different way than in. Chairman Dougherty thanked Norman for the information; the idea of driving out a different way may be achievable here and may alleviate issues. He and Bartlett Selectman Doug Garland are going to get together to discuss the Master Plan regarding short term fixes.
One of the reasons it has taken so long to get to the table is because both towns have had a lot to do especially with Hurricane Irene’s damage; it hasn’t been a matter of bad faith, just bad timing. The Selectmen pushed it off and pushed it off; it would be nice if someone would hold the Selectmen’s feet to the fire to get the Master Plan done for the Transfer Station. Chairman Dougherty noted he has also seen Transfer Stations that have been run so much worse than the Bartlett-Jackson Transfer Station.
Selectman Thompson asked what length of contract Norman would have liked to see; Norman noted, based on how long this one took to negotiate, he’d have liked to see a ten year contract. Hopefully, this will prove to be a successful contract and both towns might agree to a longer contract next time.
Jerry asked if there are any part-time employees at the Transfer Station; Chairman Dougherty noted there are part-time employees that fill in; there are three main employees up there and then when they are out the part-time employees fill in for them. He is not sure what Bartlett considers as full-time; it could be 32 to 40 hours. All three of the employees there have benefits so they are full-time. Jerry asked if one of the full-time employees is considered the manager; Chairman Dougherty noted John Edgerly is the Manager; both towns felt it was important Manager Edgerly’s position be protected and accommodated for changes.
The Board was thanked for presenting the information and arranging the Public Hearing.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7: 32 p.m.
Chairman Dougherty thanked those in attendance and those watching online.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Martha D. Tobin
Recording Secretary
| 
