Ragucci re-opens PAYT discussion
Published on September 26th, 2007
STONEHAM, MA Town Administrator David Ragucci recently revived discussions on a pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) trash fee after prophesizing the coming of a $300,000 budget buster.
According to Ragucci, a little over two years from now, the town’s current contract for refuse disposal, a compact of compacts compared to similar agreements across the Commonwealth, is set to expire.
And if Stoneham doesn’t find big ways to decrease the amount of garbage it tosses to the curb on an annual basis, the town’s repeated fiscal woes stand to grow much longer in 2010.
“”We have the proverbial gun to our head, because in 2010, if we don’t decrease our trash flow, we’ll be looking at a $300,000 increase [in disposal costs],” warned Ragucci, who informed the Selectmen that he will resuscitate discussions on PAYT options.
“We have two years to figure it out. The bad news is that there’s no easy way to do it,” the Town Administrator would later continue.
Stoneham’s current rubbish hauler, Hiltz Disposal, penned a five year pact with town officials in 2005. Despite some worries that the no-bid contract, worth a little over $742,000 in its first year, might have come cheaper in a more competitive atmosphere, Public Works Director Bob Grover appears to have harpooned quite the catch.
In fact, according to figures presented by Ragucci, Stoneham’s current $57 tipping fee, per ton of garbage dumped, sags below the state’s $80 average by $23, an approximate 29 percent margin.
The rookie Town Administrator, quite sure that the town’s end-of-the-rainbow, pot of gold, trash agreements won’t continue come 2010, sees only one way to avoid the resulting $300,000 consequence: Reduce the amount of trash that Stonehamites lug to the sidewalk each week.
According to the former Everett mayor, whose city has instituted a PAYT program, citizens routinely recycle far more under such a system, as it serves as a way for residents to control their refuse costs.
“I know all of you struggled with the trash fee issue here. But the goal is two-fold,” said Ragucci recently, arguing that a jump in recycling will lead to fewer tons of hauled trash, and with it a lower overall municipal trash pick-up budget.
“And as you reduce those costs, so goes the trash fee [charge],” explained the Town Administrator.
In the summer of 2005, the Selectmen first instituted a citizen-imposed trash fee, at that time at $150 per household, in the wake of a failed June override election.
A year later, after local votes rejected a non-binding referendum question in April of 2006, which sought input on whether the charge should continue, the Selectmen reinstituted the fee, increasing the expense by $10 per household.
The trash fee, then at $160, was again implemented, as a year earlier, after local residents rejected an override proposal – which sat on the ballot beside the question on the refuse charge.
A month later, Town Meeting stripped the Selectmen of their $3,000 salaries, a move seen as retribution against board members for ignoring the results of the non-binding election results.
In June of this year, once more after an override pitch failed by a narrow margin at the polls, the Selectmen again restored the garbage charge, this time at a $200 rate, a figure that is $40 above the total collected per household a year prior.
According to Selectman John DePinto, who opposed the garbage charge when it was first imposed – on the basis that it would not be a one time fee, as promised at the time – contends that a PAYT program is unnecessary.
According to DePinto, who has voted against the trash since voicing his initial opposition, believes Ragucci’s goal of reducing garbage can be achieved in other ways.
“I’m more concerned with enticing recycling that a pay-as-you-throw program,” said DePinto in a phone interview this week. “I’m not convinced [a PAYT] is the answer. If we get residents to recycle without pay-as-you-throw, then there’s no need.”
“It is an alternative,” the second term Selectman would say, when asked about his earlier thoughts of having a person enforce the town’s recycling mandate. “It is done in other towns. We could have a recycling warden go to areas on trash day to make sure recycling is happening.”
Despite DePinto’s suggestion that recycling rates could jump through enforcement, some town officials still believe that a PAYT program, which has been argued to be more fair to those on fixed incomes, would be more successful.
According to Finance Board Nick Stavre, evidence has shown that such PAYT options create a surge in recycling efforts amongst citizens, who attempt to control costs by decreasing the amount of garbage brought to the curb each week.
Finance Board member Richard Gregorio, who led efforts to create such a system last fall, agrees with his counterpart.
However, according to the veteran Finance Board member, whose recommendation to institute such a program last fall was ignored by the Selectmen, town officials need to be sure about their approach before another in-depth study occurs.
Last November, Gregorio was amongst a committee that sought to institute a PAYT program that would entail charging a $90 flat fee – for one free bag of trash every week - plus $2 for every other bag carted for disposal.
That figures surrounding that suggestion, which revolved around the since defunct $160 cost, would have to be tweaked to reflect the $40 increase this year.
“I don’t see us going out and doing the same thing we did last time,” the longtime Finance Board member said. “I believe we should do a pay-as-you-throw program. It’s best for the town and it’s fairest for [people on fixed incomes].”
“But to go through that again, if the Selectmen aren’t interested, would be a waste of everybody’s time,” Gregorio concluded, although he hoped that Ragucci would push forward with his plans.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!