Wednesday, September 10, 2008

The "cost certainty" of trash disposal (tip fee)

The NHRs Luther Turmelle offers some insight into the apparent communication difficulties of the five towns in the Wallingford consortium. But read the article for the differing views.

Here though, I just offer the view of Council Chair Matt Hall:

Cheshire Council Chairman Matt Hall said town officials are still assessing their options on which direction to go in terms of the plant’s future.

But he said one factor, no matter which option Cheshire officials decide upon, is “cost certainty” in terms of future expenditures associated with the disposal of trash, as well as the cost of operating the facility if it were purchased by the towns.

“I’m not certain that having us (the towns) purchase the plant is controlling our destiny because we’re not sure that option provides us with the appropriate cost certainty we’re looking for,” Hall said.

I agree that cost (certainty) of the tip fee is critical.

Tim White


Anonymous said...

The 50,000 ft view of this has Cheshire and the other towns involved over a barrel because of the way our state and local municipalities do business. If we don’t spend 10’s of millions buying the trash plant which is at the old/decrepit point in its existence we face the specter of rising disposal fees. And if we buy it what do we face?

How could CRRA offer this plant for 1 dollar to the current operators but to the towns for which it was intended the cost is 20 or 30 million? What kind of government runs in this fashion?

Can anyone living in the subject towns really believe their current town governments can provide the technical and managerial direction required to run such a facility non-stop, 24/7 so that its costs are contained and minimized to the benefit of the town tax payers? Cheshire can’t even move it 50+ year old high school off electric heat and on to something a bit more economical after years of planning to and planning to - - -.

Can anyone watching only the unfolding indeterminate delays associated with the CHS electric system replacement believe that our town councilors and their chair person could work to competitively select a least cost responsive vendor to operate and maintain this trash facility if the towns purchase it? If you can get past that issue can you get past the indeterminate pool issues as another example of town government’s inabilities to run facilities to the financial benefit of tax payers.

The current performance of town government seems to indicate that taking on overall responsibilities for an old and used up trash handling facility just might not turn out any better then the fixes to the high school heating system or the pool have turned out. Let us all hope this presently developing episode of local government drama doesn’t play out with piles of trash stored on local streets while town councils continue their performances as usual.

Anonymous said...

September 11, 2008 8:49 AM

What a depressing opinion of what can be possible.

Take Wallingford, they have their own municipal electric company and their electric rates are far below CL&P and United Illuminating.

What your saying is that we are unable to operate our schools, our sewage plant, maintain our parks, maintain our roads, our library, fire department, police department or any of the other functions that are under the controll of the residents.

If the towns don't buy and operate the plant, it is certain that Conovant will charge the maximum based on the only costly alternative of shipping the trash to Pennsylvania.

This the only show in town, nobody is going to allow another trash plant to be built in their back yard.

I'm sure state and federal funds would be available.