Minutes of Transfer Station Public Forum -- February 16, 2005 7:30 p.m. in the Town Offices
In Attendance: Steve Maddock (Chairman), Pete Bleyler (Selectman), Simon Carr, Cynthia Bagnolo, Marya Klee.
Public: Dick Jones (Selectman), Hardman Astley, Paul Klee, Nancy Elizabeth Grandine, Laura McDaniel, Tom Toner, Lee Larson, Kathy Larson, Earl Strout, Colin Robinson, Greg Spitz, Julia Elder, Jane Fant, Jackie Glass, Peter McGowan.
Apologies: Al Pryor, Laura Brannen, Vicki Bacon-Husband.
1. Steve Maddock called the meeting to order at 7:35p.m. and introduced the
a. Current Operation: in the past few months, we have made changes to the transfer station operation. We had changed our waste hauler to Chris Witcher of Warren. The packer had been relocated, giving a more convenient location for vehicles to pass through. The recyclables had been re-organised so that we had one container for all fibre (paper and cardboard), one container for commingled containers and glass is now being shipped to Littleton to be crushed as PGA. We also had purchased two containers, which were in Witcher’s pool.
b. Warrant Article Proposals: the warrant article, proposed by the committee and recommended by the Selectboard and Budget committee, is to introduce a pay-per-throw system together with enclosure of the transfer station and construction of a pole barn.
2. Pete Bleyler explained the financial implications of the proposals. The current station did not have a State permit. The packer relocation had addressed one of the permit issues, but it is also necessary to be able to enclose the station out of hours. Question from the floor: what issue is there with not having a permit? This is fundamentally, legality. There was a general discussion on the need for a legally permitted transfer station. So far, the State has not imposed any sanction, but that was not to say that they might not if we continued without a permit.
2004 we had a budget of $105,000, whereas the actual cost, due to the changes implemented, had been $96,000, even with a second attendant added. The proposal for 2005 was budgeted at $86,000.
The relative costs of solid waste and recyclables was explained (see page 1 of attached handout) Any reduction of solid waste by encouraging users to recycle would reduce our annual waste cost and increase our recyclables revenue.
Colin Robinson questioned the tonnage given. It was confirmed that this was an extrapolation derived from the period since we had changed to Witcher. Witcher had scales and was reporting the waste hauled on a weekly basis.
Jackie Glass asked whether there was likely to be a problem with illegal dumping. Of those NH towns reporting their waste and recycling to NRRA, only 3 towns out of 60+ had reported a small amount. All others had reported none. This was borne out by the pay-per-throw town sites that the committee had visited, where they had specifically asked this question.
Hardy Astley asked what bag sizes were proposed. Examples of 16gal and 33gal bags were shown. The suggestion is that bags would be sold by Nichol’s, the Country Store and the Town Office; 16gal bags would $1, 33gal bags $2, although, if approved, the Selectboard would be setting the actual charges. Steve also introduced the suggested charges for other non-recyclable items (see page 4 0f atrtached handout). These would be paid by tokens purchased from the Town Office in $2 increments.
Julia Elder raised the issue of the churches and other charitable organizations, who could be liable for heavy charges when clearing up the unsold or unusable clothing, and asked for consideration for these organizations. Again, this would be up to the Selectboard and it was pointed out that they had always considered such issues favorably in the past
3. Simon Carr presented some of the environmental issues. There was a limited and steadily decreasing number of landfill sites: Lebanon had an expected life of 14 years, Bethlehem 3-5 years. Consequently we are having to truck waste farther and are now using the Berlin site which has an expected life of 40years.
Currently we are recycling 25% of our waste, but there is the potential to recycle 40%
We had switched our tire program to a closed container. This removed the problem of stagnant water in tires, which was a breeding ground for West Nile virus.
Lee Larson said that Vershire had solved this problem by purchasing a used packer and hauling their own waste. The committee had not considered that because of the distance involved in running a packer to Berlin. Witcher’s hauled the waste by packer to their station in Warren and then transshipped it to an 18-wheeler for the haul to Berlin.
Tom Toner questioned the percentages of recycling. These are given by the State DES. He considered that 90% of residents recycled. The meeting felt that this was optimistic, but that regardless of the percentage, even people who did recycle did not necessarily recycle every single item they could. Tom also considered that illegal dumping would go up and said this had happened in Orford. This was despite the fact that Orford had reported they had no problem with illegal dumping.
4. Marya Klee presented the comparison with nearby towns. Of all our surrounding towns, only Canaan did not operate a pay-per-throw operation. We should treat waste as a utility; pay for what you want to throw, not what someone else wants to throw.
With the changes to the transfer station, we had run spot checks on out-of-town users. The first check had show 5% of out-of-town users, which was halved in a subsequent check. We will continue to run spot checks.
Colin Robinson queried the practicality of running spot checks. We had not had a problem so far.
5. Cynthia Bognolo presented an analysis of our nearest neighbors: Hanover and Orford. Our operation was simple compared to Hanover, where users either had to employ contractors at up to $30/month or had to get coupons from the town office and haul their waste to the Lebanon landfill. Recyclables are picked up on a two-weekly cycle. By comparison, Lyme had recycling and waste on the same site. Orford had a site run by Floyd Marsh, who charged $2/bag.
6. Open Session:
Kathy Larson asked for more information on what can be recycled. The committee had given out a handout at the transfer station when the recyclables were reorganized. A new leaflet giving all the information on costs and recyclables will be issued after Town Meeting and taking in to account the decisions reached there.
Dick Jones said that, whilst we would never reach a perfect solution, we should keep working on improving the operation.
Colin Robinson questioned whether the figures proposed would actually be met. The committee could only estimate based on the advice given by NRRA and other towns who had implemented pay-per-throw. The response from other towns is that they would never go back.
Earl Strout said that we needed to educate more, but that we should give the proposed system a try for two years and then review it.
Nancy Grandine asked how many households use the transfer station. There are 400-500 vehicles each Sunday; some of these are contractors servicing more than one household.
Greg Spitz asked what was happening with alternative sites. The committee had considered other locations, but the likely land cost was in the region of $500,00 which was considered impracticable. It was felt that we can operate on the garage site.
The floor asked that the committee work on further education; perhaps Lyme Beat, Valley News and the Spectator.
The meeting was closed at 9.00p.m.
7. Next meeting: The next meeting will be Wednesday March 2nd 2005 10.30 a.m. at Lyme Center Academy.
· Copy of hand-out, as referenced, is attached.
| 
