Solid Waste Committee agenda - June 29, 2010
TOWN COUNCIL SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE
7:30 P.M., TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 2010
ROOM 207, TOWN HALL, 84 SOUTH MAIN STREET, CHESHIRE, CT
AGENDA:
1. Roll Call.
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Transfer Station.
4. Bulky Waste Collection.
5. Recycling/Single Stream Recycling.
6. CRRA funds status.
7. Status report on the Wallingford Regional Solid Waste Project and Covanta.
8. Adjournment.
One thing I've been investigating is engaging in a relationship with RecycleBank. I think residents would appreciate it as Recyclebank's business plan is to literally weigh your recyclables, then pay you for them.* At this point though, it appears highly unlikely that anything would happen with them in the near future for a number of reasons. But maybe the Council could touch base with them again in a few years. Regardless, if we can at least move toward single-stream recycling, that would be a huge win for the environment and something I've wanted for a while.
Tim White
* The payments are in the form of vouchers to local stores.
55 comments:
What about re-instating the bulky waste pickup? Doesn't do much for the environment if you don't give people an option to discard bulky items.....for me, it's the only Town service I actually use & look forward to
You and me both.
Was anything discussed about the yearly bulky waste pickup?
The bulky waste pick up is a budget item. It was not budgeted for this year but could be next year if enough folks clamour for it. Money is very tight as you know.
Cheshire residents do have an option to dispose of their bulky waste at the transfer station:1286 Waterbury Rd. 2nd & 4th Sat. of the month 7:30 Am - 1:00 PM with ID. There is a $10 minimum fee but otherwise the fee is based on weight.
You may want to use some of the other available town services as they are still up and running....Library, various park & rec facilities, Senior center, parks, community pool, Mixville pond, linear trail, Arts Place,etc.
Tim Slocum
I understand that Supt Florio has about a quarter million left in his budget as of June 30. Maybe he can donate that for the bulky waste pickup.
Or does he have to keep it all to pay for the 4.4% raises that the teachers union insists on effective tomorrow?
Nice deal if you can get it.
"I understand that Supt Florio has about a quarter million left in his budget as of June 30. Maybe he can donate that for the bulky waste pickup.
Or does he have to keep it all to pay for the 4.4% raises that the teachers union insists on effective tomorrow?
Nice deal if you can get it."
It's $270K. Not going to raises BUT it is going into the medical trust fund which pays for the ever-increasing costs of medical benefits.
Tony Perugini
BOE
Thanks for the update, Tony.
You are the only guy on the BOE who seems to 1) be paying attention to where the money goes and 2) is willing to tell the public about it.
Keep it up.
"...The bulky waste pick up is a budget item. It was not budgeted for this year but could be next year if enough folks clamour for it. Money is very tight as you know. ..."
So we can dream about 10 million dollar, nice to have pool buildings. We continue to waste 300 or 400 thousand a year heating a poorly attended pool which if shut down for the winter would save us $400 thousand a year in heating costs.
But, go ahead and tax us for a very selective waste pick up service and cancel a small part of the waste pick up service because, well, it is a budget item and money is very tight.
So let's all rush out to Home Depot and get one of those big WM Bagsters to deal with our bulky waste. Just think, 5,000 thousand households buying one Bagster a year at about $200 will result in something like $1,000,000 being extracted from residents for a service which was and still should be a town supplied service.
Maybe if you could see to it that this service is re-instituted before the next election we'll again vote for you?
Try putting your junk on Craigslist. Then you can invite the pickers over whenever you want.
You could ask the guys on AJ's truck if they can take a few extra things. I've asked in the past and they were ok with it. They will not take a curb load of stuff, but they may take a few things outside of your weekly trash
You could also try hauling it to Waterbury Rd. Open way more often than bulky waste pickup. If you need help, see if a neighbor with a pickup truck will be willing to help
4:07 PM
So its all about your junk. Nice to have singular concerns and unlimited gripes.
The Town Council has many concerns and among them is the pool. You along with many others have had your opportunity to vote on a solution. I make no apologies for working towards an alternative as the pool has been a problem for taxpayers since day one. The alternitive enclosure was rejected 2:1. Nonetheless we do still have the pool problem along with next year's 3 million shortfall in the BOE budget and the list goes on. And higher taxes are not in the public interest in my estimation.
I'm sorry you may have to haul your own junk to the transfer station but its an option you have. As for the 2011 election, I'll just have take my chances should I seek to run again. If it comes down to trash, God help us.
Tim Slocum
"Thanks for the update, Tony.
You are the only guy on the BOE who seems to 1) be paying attention to where the money goes and 2) is willing to tell the public about it.
Keep it up."
Most on the BOE disagree with me when I state that the BOE isn't doing enough to be transparent and make available the most basic information (at least) to the public. It's certainly not to hide anything but most feel that enough is being done to make information available to the public but I obviously disagree.
I think that by not being proactive about publishing this information it gives the perception that "something is up" or that the BOE is trying to play "find Waldo"...which isn't the case.
BTW, the next BOE Business Meeting is Thurs July 8th at 7:30pm in TC chambers. One topic will be the appointment of a design firm for the design phase of the Turf field.
Tony P
BOE
Thanks for the info on the next Boe business meeting. Now if only Channel 16 would also announce it, instead of a still screen that just shows the CEF members names, maybe the public would become aware of the meeting. This must be a "special meeting of the board" and by not waiting until meetings resume in late August, it gives us all the appearance of the turf project being rushed along.
I'm not against the board voting to appoint a firm to come up with FIRM TOTAL pricing as long as when the vote is taken it is made clear that in no way does the Board necessarily approve this project moving forward. The turf committee can use that $10,000 that was anonymously donated (lol)to cover the cost of getting firm prices. Maybe they can work on their pricing and get back to the board in September. What's the rush? The grant is good for 10 years.
"...The Town Council has many concerns and among them is the pool. You along with many others have had your opportunity to vote on a solution. I make no apologies for working towards an alternative as the pool has been a problem for taxpayers since day one. The alternitive enclosure was rejected 2:1. Nonetheless we do still have the pool problem along with next year's 3 million shortfall in the BOE budget and the list goes on. And higher taxes are not in the public interest in my estimation...."
We voiced our opinion of the pool for those who hadn't already figured it out. You needed to spend another 20 grand to get an official vote and quite possibly the outcome surprised you. At the rate you are working towards an alternative guess what may freeze over before you and our town's politicians actually get to your alternative.
None the less we still have the pool problem- - pretty much shows exactly how effective the most recent efforts by our local political class have been with the pool. Of course the effort did make some extra work for our already overburdened municipal employees who already had one election effort scheduled for November.
And no, it's not all about our junk unless you consider town politics junk. Clearly government should only be taxing people for truly vital services. Pools and artificial turf playing fields are in no way vital. Collection of sewage and yes, collection of bulky waste are two services which are vital. So far the local political class has indicated that an indoor pool is very important. They have reduced the once a year bulky waste pick up to once every 24 months and now have totally eliminated it. What next, is there some way we can now deny sewage collection too? Think of what that could save.
Local government seems to be quite challenged remaining in touch with its fundamental responsibilities.
What you want is considered "vital", things like bulky waste. What other people want is not vital, you are nothing but a joke. So you get to decide what is vital, pick of large junk is vital? No wonder this town is a mess.
"I'm not against the board voting to appoint a firm to come up with FIRM TOTAL pricing as long as when the vote is taken it is made clear that in no way does the Board necessarily approve this project moving forward."
You are correct. The point of hiring the design firm without using taxpayer dollars (i.e. donations) is to come up with firm pricing and specifications. Once we have that detail, the BOE can discuss moving it to the next step or not. Appointing a design firm does not mean acceptance of the turf field project.
"The turf committee can use that $10,000 that was anonymously donated (lol)to cover the cost of getting firm prices."
Actually, the turf committee has no powers to act on behalf of the town or BOE. The BOE would need to pay the design firm and then get reimbursed by the CEF. I'm still not clear how donated money can or would be transferred between the 5013c corp and the BOE/Town.
"Maybe they can work on their pricing and get back to the board in September. What's the rush? The grant is good for 10 years."
The turf field will not go in before the fall...logistically it's not feasible as there are many more approvals ahead and we have yet to discuss the Turf project, as a whole, on the BOE...before it (if) gets to the TC. Also remember that the committee has not raised all of the money, yet.
I believe the "rush" may be due to some angst that Hartford may yank the grant shortly after the fall elections. Our State budget is how many billions in the hole? But quite frankly, the turf committee has done what it can with guesstimates...so it's logical to move on to hard numbers at this point.
As for the BOE meeting next week, it's not for turf but our 20/20 Committee is working through the summer on recommendations for School Consolidation/Grade Restructuring/Redistricting (this is a separate topic that I hope to report on soon).
I also expect that the planning committee will try to move the CHS Boys locker room project forward by at least appointing a committee to look at possible solutions. So we may be meeting a couple of more times before Sept.
Thx,
Tony Perugini
Hopefully the turf committee have good lawyers and accountants involved. When you become a 501c3 charity to raise money for a specific project, you better put that money towards that project. If it ends up falling through, I would assume they will continue until the day they beat us down and get the turf.
I do have a question, since they don't have powers to act for the town or the BOE, how do they have power to sell the naming rights of the field? Shouldn't that be decided by the BOE or TC?
"I do have a question, since they don't have powers to act for the town or the BOE, how do they have power to sell the naming rights of the field? Shouldn't that be decided by the BOE or TC?"
Correct, it needs approval by the BOE and/or TC. I think they can also ask for donations (commitments) for naming rights but nothing is named unless it's approved. As far as I know, nobody has purchased naming rights so far.
Tony Perugini
I notice that no one talks about the structurally deficient bridge on Country Club Road--not even Mr. Mayor...wonder how much bulky waste the pool would hold before it's capped off with dirt ??>>>
You should see the trash--couches, tables mattresses etc taht gets dumped off weekly on Reservoir Road and Bethany Mtn..
11:11
Have a great Independence Day!
Sealed bids on the Country Club Rd bridge replacement were due July 2nd. I do not know more about the bids received. The bid calls for replacing the bridge and repairing about 300 ft of roadway and watermain. The town Council authorized 600K for this in last years Cap. budget and voters gave it a go in Nov. 2009.
As for the slobs that litter our roads with mattresses and sofas I suspect they are among the same clan that spray graffiti and generally don't give a damb about you or me or much about anything. I doubt they are waiting for a bulky waste pickup but you can be sure our public works personnel or state workers are picking up their crap eventually and we the taxpayers are footing the bill.
Mr. Mayor
The last bulky waste pick up was in 2008. During the 2010 budget process the town manager did not include the appropriation in his 2010 budget plan. The annual cost is 150,000. The budget committee and the council was supportive with some understanding that some residents might be unhappy but understanding.
It is still a tough economy and it will be difficult to include the pick up for next year but many on this blog have complained. I'm not certain any of you knew how much this service cost...and you must agree $150,000 is a lot of money.
Tim Slocum
"As for the slobs that litter our roads with mattresses and sofas I suspect they are among the same clan that spray graffiti and generally don't give a damb about you or me or much about anything."
Didn't we already determine that our precious high school kids are doing the graffiti? Are they not the ones responsible for the beautiful black spots all over Bartlem Park?
To the vandals - maybe you could consider stealing the pool? Take the whole thing - building, lockerrooms, "the great wall", water, kiddie pool. People try to steal everything else in town, maybe they can do us some good and take the pool. At the very least, maybe they can just take the bubble. Just a thought.
I don't understand why I have to pay taxes towards cleaning up other people's junk they willingly collect and keep in their cluttered homes and properties. For those slobs that are complaining about no bulky waste pickup this year take some responsibility for yourself and call a junk removal service. Pay for it out of your own pocket. The TM got it right this year when he excluded bulky waste pickup.
"It is still a tough economy and it will be difficult to include the pick up for next year but many on this blog have complained. I'm not certain any of you knew how much this service cost...and you must agree $150,000 is a lot of money."
Tim, please don't make us pay to remove other people's crap from their properties. This is a joke.
That $150K should be used for more important and responsible items such as retaining some of the laid off teachers, for starters.
As an above post explains, the bulky waste pickup is a line item in the budget, but it was not budgeted for this year...meaning there's -0- dollars in that account. So there's no $150,000 that is going to be used towards reinstating any of the 7 teacher layoffs.
"...and you must agree $150,000 is a lot of money...."
8:46 you have a way with numbers. $150,000 is a lot of money when it comes to a town service which almost everyone always needs. Everyone always uses it when it was available. The town political class cancelled this expenditure because, well it's a lot of money. IT was only an every other year thing as well.
While they cancelled this every other year service they also were increasing the every year subsidy to the town pool used by almost nobody (where's the actual attendance data?) up to almost $400,000. The political class also seems supportive of a multi-million dollar deal to replace grass with plastic too.
The town political class seems to have its priorities a bit mixed up.
7:34 AM
What's this political class crap? Residents elect the volunteers that make these decisions. The volunteers live in your town too. If you don't like it vote them out.
"8:46 you have a way with numbers. $150,000 is a lot of money when it comes to a town service which almost everyone always needs."
Everyone doesn't need it, it's a nice to have and certainly not a need. It's ludicrous that taxpayers should have to pay extra taxes for slobs to clean up their properties. What's next, do you want the taxpayers to wipe for you too??? Stop being a slob, take responsibility for your own junk and use your own money to haul it away. Stop leeching off the taxpayers.
"The town political class seems to have its priorities a bit mixed up."
Speaking of ignorance, it was the Town Manager not the political class that decided against bulky-slob waste pickup this year. Milone made the right decision.
For God's sake people, get off the "7 teacher layoff".
We have less students in our schools then we did 5 years ago. We should have less teachers.
Does anyone look at the amount of teachers we had 5 years ago versus today and the amount of the students we had 5 years ago versus today?
Lets end it.
Next year will be worse.
No bulky trash pick up again and even less teachers.
"For God's sake people, get off the "7 teacher layoff".
You're right because it's actually 15 teaching positions eliminated, not 7. And the $150K should be put towards reinstating some of those positions ASAP not collecting people's junk. That's a great message you're sending the kids "We value junk more than you".
9:39 I don't have an issue with 7 layoffs. I only mentioned it because people are probably thinking there were more layoffs. And for some reason people think that the $150K can just be put towards another part of the budget - just like some thought the 7 million for the permanent pool cover should have been put towards education. That's not how it works.
I understand less students would logically mean less teachers. Next year will be worse. People need to get creative with how we deliver education to students - they need to stop blaming our local volunteer TC & Boe for the poor economy.
9:45
Went back to an older post I left and found these figures taken directly from the State of CT Education Dept.
In 2006/2007 there were 336.4 teachers with 5157 students.Thats an average of 15.3 students per teacher.
According to the Superintendents budget proposal from this year, the expected enrollment for the 2010/2011 school year will be 485. According to my math, that comes out to 307 less students now then we had 4 years ago.
Now take the 348 teachers that will be in place and it comes out to an average 13.94 students per teacher.
Granted, maybe I am not seeing the whole picture, but as far as I can see, with 307 less students, perhaps we should have let 5 more teachers go to be equal to the 2006/7 level.
Care to enlighten us on why we should increase the number of teachers then decrease?
Go look at the projected enrollment over the next several years, it will be even less.
"...Speaking of ignorance, it was the Town Manager not the political class that decided against bulky-slob waste pickup this year...."
Now let us see. You are claiming that our most wonderful TM and not our wonderful town council is the one setting our taxes. The TM decides what the town does and does not do concerning minor items such as taxes and services?
Very interesting. Tell us how the TM took over and how our elected officials no longer are in charge?
9:39 a.m. the town's political class has wormed its way into incredible places and somehow we now have hired workers deciding all by themselves what is and what is not required. Or so say you anyway.
Sorry, re: my 10:13 post, left off the 0.
The incoming enrollment for the 2010/11 school year is projected to be 4,850. That is 301 less than 2006/07
"Very interesting. Tell us how the TM took over and how our elected officials no longer are in charge?"
Did I say ignorance? Sorry, I meant stupidity. Yes, it is true, the TM decided to not include the bulky waste pickup this year. If you attended the budget committee meeting you would've heard Michael talk to this.
"9:39 a.m. the town's political class has wormed its way into incredible places "
All this over no bulky waste pickup, LMAO!
"Care to enlighten us on why we should increase the number of teachers then decrease?"
Enrollment has dropped and the number of teaching positions eliminated has superceded the trend. Yes...between 2009-2010/2010-2011 we lost 31 teaching positions for 307 students. That comes out to ~10 students per teacher. To say Cheshire hasn't kept up with reducing teachers is simply ignorant.
And, at the same time, Fed/State education mandates have increased substantially. Most of you misfits here won't be able to get through the elementary curriculum around Math, Science, Reading, Writing, Languages. It's become much more comprehensive than it was 50 years when you barely got through grade school.
Ignorance: It's what's for breakfast in Cheshire when bulky waste pickup gets cancelled.
2:33
Where is the 31 teachers coming from?
All I have read was 15 less this year.
It sounds like you don't look at statistics very well and are nothing but a blowhard.
With your "knowlege" of federal and state mandates, making the course load even harder, who is training the tenured teachers who have been teaching for 20+ years?
Are they all keeping up with it?
Here are more stats:
2004-05--5,179 students/337 teachers thats a ratio of 15.37
2005-06--5,176 students/351 teachers (the year after the 0% increase we added 14 teachers with 3 less students) ratio of 14.75
2006-07--5,157 students/347 teachers-ratio of 14.86
2007-08--5,120 students/359 teachers-ratio of 14.26
State education Dept. did not have 2008-08 or 09-10 figures updated.
2010-11--4,850 students/348 teachers--ratio of 13.94
Please someone explain to me why we are having such an outcry?
We have 11 more teachers then we did in 2004-05 and we have 329 less students.
"With your "knowlege" of federal and state mandates, making the course load even harder, who is training the tenured teachers who have been teaching for 20+ years?
Are they all keeping up with it?"
Yes, they are...it's state mandated and your beloved school district trains all teachers with your tax dollars. Are you really this ignorant? Might want to spend some time at the BOE meetings or *GASP* call the education office to get some facts. You'll be surprised.
You were all supposed to stay inside, drink plenty of fluids and keep cool. All this blather about teachers and trash has you boiling. Take a breather. Who cares...its summer.
5:18
Perhaps some of those teachers are sleeping through the training based on what I have experienced.
Are you "that ignorant" to think that all the teachers in this town shuld still be educating our children?
I notice you skirt the issue on the state facts that 3:39 provided that show we have 11 more teachers with 329 less students since 2004-05. How do you justify wanting more teachers now?
Or are you the "ignorant" one?
Here are the Sptd's "class size" stats for the past decade with links for granularity.
"Here are the Sptd's "class size" stats for the past decade with links for granularity."
Tim, those are not the superintendents stats, they are your stats using a simple average. Why don't you post the actual class size by grade by school report that's included in the Super's budget each year? This report shows the true number of students enrolled in our classrooms. If you don't have the report, ping one of the BOE members for it. Then folks can compare apples-apples here.
9:08... the # of "certified staff" and # of students are both from the BOE / Sptd budget books.
The ratio (which I know is completely irrelevant) is mine.
Nonetheless, I included links to scanned images of the stats. And those images are taken directly from the budget books.
9:08
The superintendent can try to fudge numbers, but the State Dept. of Education has an accurate accounting. So this is what we must go by.
Like it or not, the numbers don't lie.
A lot less students and only a few less teachers.
There is nothing wrong with our student/teacher ratio. The quality lies in how good are those teachers.
How come the town BOE web site doesn't provide the info on number of teachers and students over the past 20 or 30 years?
It appears that Tim White has cornered the market for providing simple basic facts associated with town government.
What is wrong with this picture - - -?
I'm not sure, but an increased difficulty in rewriting history may be an issue??
Actually it appears that Tim White isn't publishing everything. 9:08 has a valid point and I've never seen that report Tim references in the budget book, at least not the 2010-2011.
Tim, why don't you publish the K-6 and Middle School class size report for 2009/2010 that's included in the budget workbook specifically in the "Enrollment" section? I think this is the one folks are referring to. If we're going to discuss facts, let's at least present them. If you don't have the report, let me know and I'll email it to you.
"I'm not sure, but an increased difficulty in rewriting history may be an issue??"
Or perhaps not showing all facts could be another reason Tim.
BTW, what the heck does this have to do with bulky waste collection?
Tony Perugini
BOE
Tim, why don't you publish the K-6 and Middle School class size report for 2009/2010 that's included in the budget workbook specifically in the "Enrollment" section?
Fair point that I noticed after I commented. Regardless, as I've explained here before... the answer is because it takes time to scan and upload all those spreadsheets. I think it'd be great if Humiston did it. But they've got time constraints as well.
My suggestion:
"Whereas the BOE supports greater transparency; and
Whereas...
Therefore..."
Tell you what though... anyone can open a blogger account, then if you scan the images, upload them to blogger and email me the links... I'll do a front page post on them. Seriously, I'm fine with that. I really just don't want to spend the time to do it right now... lots of other non-Town stuff on my plate right now.
"I'm not sure, but an increased difficulty in rewriting history may be an issue??"
Or perhaps not showing all facts could be another reason Tim.
Tony... I hope you understand that my reference is to a 2005 issue. And if it wasn't a legitimate point on my part, I would've gotten plenty of pushback at that time. But I didn't. And frankly, I never got a straight answer... other than "it was an excel formula issue." And that wasn't logical because if it was a copy'n'paste issue with formulae, then it would've been consistently wrong. And it wasn't.
Tim, I'll spend more time helping post up the education materials. Not that this particular thread is the best place for it. I have these enrollment reports and will make a blogger account, post them up, etc. I think it's worthwhile to have this information here somewhere for reference because we'll be revisiting this particular topic again in September when the 20/20 Committee issues its' recommendations. The 20/20 Committee itself is going to be a lengthy discussion here.
Tony P
Oh, and for the record, many folks from the BOE, BOE committees and past BOE members read your blog Tim. Though, they don't appear to be posting but my ears were ringing from a few of them reading this thread. :-) I'm sure I'll get an earful Thursday night too.
Tony Perugini
Oh, and for the record, many folks from the BOE, BOE committees and past BOE members read your blog Tim.
Interesting. I really wasn't sure if any BOE members (beside you) read it.
Tony
What about the facts stated on the State Dept. of Education's site that have student enrollment and number of teachers?
Are you saying those aren't accurate? Where do they get those from?
An earlier post had figures taken from that site, are they wrong?
It sounds like fuzzy math again.
Bottom line, is there much difference in the student/teacher ratio now from 2004-05?
It is ridiculous if the state has one set of numbers and our superintendent has a different set.
3:25 it is ridiculous.
The superintendent and the BOE need to be doing a much better job providing the electorate with timely info 365 days a year, not just when they are finalizing their budget and drowning us in their silly PP presentations.
How amazing Tony, asking Tim to publish k-6 data on this blog. Tony, get the superintendent to put that info up on an easy-to-find location on a town sponsored web site. Shouldn't that be one of the duties and responsibilities of the superintendent?
Just how much does the BOE and the town spend for web services annually and alternately how much does Tim spend?
how much does Tim spend?
haha... I pay my monthly internet bill (about $25, I think). But I'd pay that regardless. My camera / videocam was a Christmas present from M&D. And I pay for gas to go to the meetings -- where I get a lot of handouts.
All told, I figure I spend about $0 to do this blog... but I'm guessing you knew that... so this comment was more for non-regulars. :)
Post a Comment