Paying for the Privilege
May 19, 2008 on 12:49 pm | In Local, Main |
You know, now that the kerfuffle over the purchase of land for a new Salisbury-Sharon transfer station has subsided (at least for the moment), I’ve had time to consider some other thoughts about garbage. Yes, it’s time to talk trash!
One of the central questions posed by opponents of the Luke and Fitting properties was “What about Sharon? She hasn’t committed on paper to anything. She will get all of the benefits of the new transfer station while assuming none of the up-front costs and the associated risks.” [apologies to Mike LaRose for the use of the feminine pronoun!]
Still others have asked, “What about Millerton? Would we want to invite Millerton to join us since residents there have been without a transfer station for 15 years?” Well, if you listen to my simple proposal, the answer to both of those questions will be: “Who cares about them? Build it and they will come.”
It’s time to revisit the concept known as Pay As You Throw (PAYT). Despite one of the highest recycling rates in the state, the Salisbury-Sharon Transfer Station hemorrhages money (or it did the last time I checked). It costs over $1 million a year to keep it going.
The only item in the town budget that’s higher is the Board of Education. The transfer station is supported by taxpayer dollars way beyond revenues generated by sticker fees and charges for appliance disposal and the like. Am I right, Brian Bartram?
The concept was broached in 2001 when the Transfer Station and Recycling Advisory Committee (TRAC) was first formed. But my recollection is there was such a outcry over it that officials abandoned the idea. Public pressure worked.
When my family and I vacation at Lake George almost every summer, we use a transfer station in Queensbury, N.Y. A few years earlier we used one in nearby Whitehall. I remember asking the owners of the place we were renting what we should do with our garbage.
No problem, they said, recycle as usual and put your garbage in one of these big brown bags, take the stuff to the transfer station, pay $2.50 to dispose of the bag and you can recycle glasses, paper and plastic free of charge. No stickers necessary. Anyone can use the facility if you simply pay to throw your non-recyclables into the hopper.
Some towns, such as Amenia, use a hybrid approach, with PAYT combined with a sticker fee. But again, it could be set up so that anyone can buy a sticker.
Why aren’t we using that approach here? Not only would it eliminate the question of what to do about Sharon and Millerton (anyone could use the facility) but it would reduce taxes and provide a powerful incentive to recycle, which will bring more money into town coffers.
In addition, it is a much fairer system. Why should light users of the transfer station (e.g. the little old lady at Lion’s Head) subsidize the waste expenses of a family of six by paying the exact same fees?
We need to talk seriously about this issue because it’s an idea whose time has come. I was not living in Salisbury at the time, but I recall reading media accounts of when then-Selectman Peter Oliver floated the idea and was attacked on the letters to the editor page.
Why do so many people become apoplectic at the mere mention of PAYT? I guess it’s because change, no matter how much sense it makes, is difficult for some people.
P.S. There is no constitutional right to throw garbage in your town’s solid waste hopper without paying a little something extra. I don’t even think it’s in the Declaration of Independence.
7 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
It’s not just change, Terry, it’s cost. I have noted for years that the Salisbury/Sharon Transfer Station is the best waste disposal deal around. When I lived in the nearby Hudson Valley I paid more per month than it costs per year here and that was more than 10 years ago! While PAYT is fairer and a better way to recover expenses even at $2.50 a bag most Salisbury residents would see a significant cost increase. Consider a family that generates 4 bags per week. At $2.50 a bag the $500. plus per year that will cost will certainly not make them proponents of PAYT. Most PAYT customers I know have a trash compactor and are very creative about managing the volume of their trash but not necessarily better at recycling. As for welcoming all comers, it might get you more trash than you can haul… especially if the price is right.
Comment by Dick Paddock — May 19, 2008 #
Dick, you make some good points, but I think you miss the gist of the post. Correct me if I’m wrong, Terry, but it seemed that the suggestion was that Salisbury takes the same tack Amenia has: i.e. the hybrid approach. Make a yearly pass available for a fixed price, but also allow PAYT for those light users of the transfer station. Residents can decide which would be more cost-effective for them.
Comment by Amy — May 19, 2008 #
Amy,
Re: the hybrid approach. Amenia charges a yearly fee for the sticker, plus a per-bag fee. It’s not necessarily one or the other.
Dick,
Yes, the yearly cost for most people would exceed the current sticker fee. But what you are missing is the hidden cost of running the transfer station through your property taxes.
Would not our property taxes go down under this plan? Maybe $2.50/bag would not be enough. I just picked the number at random. But I’d like to see the transfer station become self-sufficient. If you’re not paying per bag, then you’re paying to operate the station by some other means, right? The money has got to come from someplace.
Comment by Terry — May 20, 2008 #
I like the idea of real estate taxes going to the transfer station. That way, as with education, the weekenders support the locals. Also, I don’t want to open my wallet everytime I throw a bag in the hopper. I bet with PAYT, more people would chuck their garbage in the woods or at the roadside.
Comment by Peter Halle — May 20, 2008 #
Never I say! Never!
Pay As You Throw….
Only if they have a VISA casrd swipe at the dumpster!
I don’t want to buy tickets in advance…
Tickets? Tickets? We don’t need no stinking tickets!
I could care less if they charged more for the yearly sticker…
PAYT is a plan whos time has come and gone.
Why build new stte of the art transfer station if we are just going to line up, py the man nd toss the garbage?
Maybe if you put a bullseye on the back of the dumpster, whoever hits it the most wins a month free of PAYT.
Comment by Marshall — May 20, 2008 #
Terry, with all due respect, this issue was addressed thoroughly by the TRAC cmte. 7plus yrs. ago. I suggest you research some of the CT towns that currently use PAYT and see what their experience is/has been. I think you will find lower recycling rates and massive cheating. Perhaps you could speak to Bob Palmer, he can give you all the details.
BTW, Peter Halle is “right on” about the tax burden, it falls disproportionly on the wealthy who one, can afford it, and two, don’t care.
I wonder how many bags of PAYT Hotchkiss would have, we DO want to be perfectly fair don’t we?
Comment by Paul Henrici — May 20, 2008 #
Paul,
My understanding is PAYT typically does not apply to haulers such as Hotchkiss uses (I think they use Welsh Sanitation), unless the trucks were weighed and billed on the spot.
I’m not suggesting there is anything wrong with TRAC’s research, but why would the experience of CT towns be so different from NYS, where PAYT seems to be the norm? Do they know something in the Empire State that we don’t, or vice versa?
And just because people can afford to pay higher taxes doesn’t mean they should. Why, for example, don’t we greatly reduce our fees for participation in the town’s rec programs and support it more with the property taxes of the wealthy? This is simply a question of a user fee for a specific service rather than a broad-based tax to support it.
Comment by Terry — May 20, 2008 #