July 05, 2009 12:37 am Trash limit is first step To the editor: Kudos are in order for Town Manager "Buzz" Stapczynski, Selectman Brian Major and Selectman Ted Teichert for their skepticism about Andover's recent three-barrel-a-week trash limit and mandatory no-recycle-bin, no-trash-pickup proposal. I guess the other selectmen, like many of our state and federal representatives, couldn't be bothered with either the facts about our present recycling program or the bizarre revenue projections from this lame-brained proposal. The proponents of the more onerous mandatory trash proposal attempted to justify their action by painting a picture that characterized Andoverites as anti-environment, trash-generating degenerates. Let us once again place the facts in one place where our other three selectmen won't have to exert too much effort to get at them. As was pointed out previously, data from the Andover Recycles Web page demonstrates a continuously increasing recycle participation rate for residents from 81 percent in 2003 to 87 percent in 2007. The Andover Recycles Web page also states: "Recycling Goal: A national standard suggests that 35 percent of collections should be recycled materials." According to the MASS DEP, Andover's calendar year 2007 recycle rate was 43 percent. Additionally, Andover's recycle rate has exceeded the national standard in five of the six years between 2002 and 2007. Total disposal costs for 2005 and 2006 went from slightly over $2.5 million to about $1.5 million in 2006 and 2007 due to a new 2006 North East Solid Waste contract. Consequently, in 2006 the cost slope for our total solid waste was reduced approximately $1 million. This means that in 2007 and future years, we have been paying an inflation-adjusted rate of $1 million less every year for the same solid waste tonnage. Finally, of 201 cities and towns reporting recycle rates to the DEP in 2007, Andover was 51st or was in the top 25 percent of recyclers. In FY 2007, not only did Andover's total cost of recycling go down dramatically, but the town also received a $3.6 million North East Solid Waste one-time settlement. This settlement was the equivalent of about 2.4 years of totally free trash costs. Instead of going into a trash sinking fund, the $3.6 million went into free cash, where it could be spent for anything by a simple majority vote of the selectmen. In 2007, $2 million of the $3.6 million was voted into a stabilization fund that requires a two-thirds vote by selectmen. So why did the three selectmen vote to reduce our trash pickup from six to four barrels a week? The answer lies in the June 25 Andover Townsman. Andover has been spending like a drunken sailor for years. Some voices like Selectman Brian Major have stood up and continuously warned of the consequences for these excesses. Nevertheless, salaries and benefits have continued to outpace the private sector, with 30 employees making more than the Town Manager and 117 employees making more than $100,000 in 2008. With the downturn in the economy, retirement funds have taken substantial losses and the state has dramatically reduced its funding to the towns. So it would appear that the only conceivable reason for the town to attack our current trash program is to implement a new trash tax, one of a new series of transfer tax programs whose proceeds will be used to benefit Andover's exorbitant salaries and programs. This has as its ultimate goal an Andover pay-as-you-throw trash tax. A hint of this intent was given by Selectman Jerry Stabile who is quoted as stating, "... a four barrel limit is a good first step." As both the Andover Townsman and the Eagle-Tribune editorial boards have stated, Andover's financial woes are not due to revenues but to expenditures. David Birnbach recently was quoted as stating, "Teacher salaries have gone up 34 percent in the past five years, and student population has gone up only 2.8 percent." The April 16 Townsman editorial stated, "Andover has put itself in a financial bind by approving salaries, benefits and, to a lesser degree, projects it cannot afford to sustain." Andover has been negotiating union contracts and caving in to exorbitant increases in salaries and benefits for years. So fellow Andoverites, hang on to your wallets. For now, we may have impeded a new trash tax, but we must be vigilant lest we wake up one day to find even more onerous sports fees, meals taxes and a plethora of new taxation. Mike Mosca Andover Energy bill disappoints To the editor: The recent passage by the House of the American Clean Energy and Security Act is a significant disappointment. While the problems this legislation is trying to address are real the solutions proposed by this bill are not well thought out. How is this bill going to prevent the elimination of jobs in this country? The energy cost increase on factories here will make them even less competitive in the global economy. Factories will close here (reducing emissions) but the work will be transferred to China or India where the emissions will continue unabated. I keep hearing that new jobs will be created just like what has occurred in Spain. Last time I checked the unemployment rate in Spain was 17.4 percent. Is this something to look forward to? Perhaps after this bill is passed, 17.4 percent unemployment will look good. This bill is too massive and not well enough thought out. I urge everyone to write their senators to stop this. Phil Byrnes Windham, N.H.
—
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.