Ginny Dickey: It’s easy to see our residents have embraced recycling. Now it’s time to move from what was intended to be an interim program (bins) to releasing the RFP for single-hauler pick-up.

I’ve been advocating for curbside recycling and limited trucks for a long time. Council approved recycling the number one environmental goal in 2008. Everyone’s been to the table and offered valuable input; we’ve considered their issues and in a transparent way are proceeding, including their suggestions, to benefit our entire community.

We’re following standard business practices with competitive bidding. Basic economics point to the high likelihood of reduced cost per household.

The contracted entity handles billing and customer communication. Options in the agreement will address service satisfaction. The responses will determine if we move forward.  

Why try? Road repairs reduced conservatively by 21 percent.

Less cans out daily (safer for pedestrians, kids boarding buses, aesthetics).

Reduced noise, particulate emissions, fumes, fuel consumption.

Energy savings from reusing paper, glass, etc. (Newspapersuse 67 percent recycled paper; 17 million barrels of oil, to produce the 28 billion water bottles used annually, equals fuel for 100,000 cars and emits 2.5 million tons of CO2).

Divert some of the 4.6 pounds of trash/person/day (landfills at a premium…permitting and property costs passed to consumers; resistance to new dumps); RecycleBank rewards monthly.

We recycled 930 tons in 2008, equivalent to 382 households’ annual energy consumption; 504 cars off the roads; 6402 barrels of oil or 312,486 gallons of gas. Jurisdictions that implement programs see a 30 percent increase in participation.

Tait Elkie: The bigger question here is how do we get the best service for the lowest cost and explore options to keep some flexibility for our private HOAs. 

I am not in favor of the town contracting with a single trash hauler to handle our town’s trash and recycling needs simply out of convenience.

Every service should be looked at under the microscope right now for the best possible cost to serve our citizens effectively. 

I always question when a government entity, whether it be federal, state or local, becomes involved with the free market. It almost always results in higher fees, inefficiency, and a lower quality of service. 

The town’s proposed criteria for bidding on the trash hauling should also be examined to ensure fairness for not only the big guys, but also smaller “mom and pop” trash hauling and recycling operations.

I empathize with resident frustrations about the number of trash hauling trucks on the road, and the issues relating to safety and the higher levels and frequency of traffic caused by multiple haulers. Something clearly needs to be done to address these issues. 

I look forward to exploring the alternatives in a candid and fiscally-responsible manner sensitive to the needs of our residents and businesses.

If the town ultimately does move toward a predominant trash hauler, we should make sure the contract is relatively short in duration allowing us the ability to evaluate service and change or cancel service as needed. 

Hugh Henry: The town should be divided into two or three areas based on population. This allows more than one hauler to demonstrate their ability to perform at or above their commitment.

This method would meet the objective of one hauler on an individual street on specific days of the week. Should the town decide to collect a tax on this service, the hauler could collect a specified amount ($1 or $2 per month) along with their monthly fee.

The gated community is a different matter. To make things equitable, if the town decided to collect a tax, a mechanism would need to be developed.

Recycling is an admirable thing to do in the community. The only item that has a positive cash flow is recycling aluminum cans. All other items appear to be at best break even from a cost recovery standpoint. For environmental reasons, if the individual consumer decides to recycle they may incur an additional cost.

Henry Leger: Reducing trash hauler traffic and offering curbside recycling have been expressed needs by our residents for a number of years. These issues have also been a topic of interest during the town’s citizen-driven strategic planning process. To address this and other related needs, an environmental committee was established.

Today, the committee, under the direction of the Town Council, is studying alternative methods for residential trash hauling/recycling and gathering information regarding cost of service. This research includes input from trash haulers, residents, homeowner associations, and other municipalities. At the end of their research, the committee will present a detailed proposal for Town Council’s consideration and action.

Review of other communities and neighborhoods that have consolidated or moved to a single trash hauler indicate a number of benefits which include: lower cost of service to residents; less wear and tear on streets; reduction in air/noise pollution and landfill dumping; and ability to bid periodically to maintain competitive pricing. Similar benefits have been realized by HOAs within our community by contracting with a single trash hauler.

Minimizing wear and tear on our streets results in significant cost saving to taxpayers and mitigates negative impacts on our environment. These factors must be weighed against the concern for individual choice.

Once our research is completed, I will make a decision that has the best interest of our community in mind. I will consider supporting a proposal that provides a competitive price for our residents for the same level of service they receive today.

Mike Archambault: My position on this subject is still open because all the pieces of this puzzle have not yet been assembled. Information is still being gathered regarding Recycle Bank (rewards program) and our town staff continues to research all possible trash haulers.

Once all the pieces are in place, and the responses to the town’s Request for Proposals (RFP) are received from trash haulers, then the community will know the true costs and only then can a fair decision be made.

Whatever the outcome, I will do as I’ve always done as a member of Town Council, make a decision that is best for the community as a whole; based on facts, not emotion.

I am aware some residents believe the town is taking the freedom of competition away from them. This may be true if looked at from an individual perspective, but homeowner associations (HOA) are doing exactly the same thing as the town; looking to get the best price for its residents. Having each hauler bid for the service is competition.

In my opinion what the community must weigh in its decision on this complex subject is threefold: (1) the direct cost of the program to each household; (2) the indirect cost of damage to our streets caused by multiple trash haulers; and (3) the benefit to the environment.  When all the pieces of this puzzle have been assembled, I’m confident the right decision will be made.