Town of Plymouth Article 7D Solid Waste Annual Town Meeting - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Town of Plymouth Article 7D Solid Waste Annual Town Meeting PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 5b6f7e-OTZmY



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Town of Plymouth Article 7D Solid Waste Annual Town Meeting

Description:

Town of Plymouth Article 7D Solid Waste Annual Town Meeting Town of Plymouth Department of Public Works April 6, 2013 Solid Waste Management History: Expiration of ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:82
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: marr67
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Town of Plymouth Article 7D Solid Waste Annual Town Meeting


1
Town of Plymouth Article 7D Solid Waste Annual
Town Meeting
  • Town of Plymouth
  • Department of Public Works
  • April 6, 2013

2
Solid Waste Management
  • History
  • Expiration of County Lease, South Street
  • Capping of South Street
  • Expiration of SEMASS Contract
  • Low recycling/High disposal rates
  • Declining sticker sales
  • Changes in future disposal markets
  • Increases to Manomet Cedarville with the
    closing of South Street

3
The Urgency Tipping fees are tripling, from 23
per ton now to 65 per ton or more in 2015.
  • Inaction will punish transfer station users.
  • Residents will generate twice as much trash as
    needed, at triple todays disposal cost.
  • Transfer station users will pay a higher fee.
  • If nothing is done

Private Subscription Curbside users will continue
to pay roughly twice as much as necessary. And
they will do it with negligible recycling, to the
further detriment of our environment.
The status quo is unsustainable and will cost
everyone more money. Transfer station revenues
are declining, costs are increasing, and we will
need to make significant investments in a
facility we may not be able to use long term
(South Street).
4
Developing Options
  • Developed multiple options in conjunction with
  • Outreach
  • Past studies, reports, civic engagement
  • Working with the MADEP
  • Looking at other communities
  • Number of current private subscriptions
  • Technologies
  • Future disposal
  • Our focus has been on reducing resident and town
    costs by
  • Reducing trash tonnages
  • Increasing recycling
  • Building fairness into the system

5
Public Process Since Fall Town Meeting
  • 2012
  • October 20 Solid waste information booth with
    handouts posted Fall Town Meeting
  • October 24 First community forum held (Council
    on Aging)
  • November 26 Second community forum held (Town
    Hall)
  • November 27 Public presentation and discussion
    (at Selectmens meeting)
  • December 6 Third community forum held (Town
    Hall)
  • December 11 Fourth community forum held
    (Plymouth Airport)
  • 2013
  • January 14 Fifth community forum held (Plymouth
    South Middle School)
  • February 12 Public presentation and discussion
    (at Selectmens meeting)
  • February 26 Presentation with Board of
    Selectmen.  Vote 4-1 in favor of Option 3.
  • February 27 Discussion with Finance Committee.
    Vote 3-8 against Option 3.
  • March 5 Presentation to Finance Committee.  Vote
    9-2 in favor of Option 3.
  • Initially, curbside-only was determined to be the
    most economical option. Given resident feedback
    and desire for choice, however, the Town changed
    course.

6
Option 3
  • 1. Transfer Stations with Pay as You Throw for
    6-months
  • 2. Close two stations on January 1, 2014
  • 3. Program Effective January 1, 2014
  • 4. Residents select option in Spring 2013
  • Residents choose their waste option
  • Curbside with Pay as You Throw and single
    stream recycling
  • or
  • Manomet Transfer Station with Pay as You Throw

7
Recommendation
  • Option 3 because
  • Financial considerations
  • Lower cost over ten years - Residents and Town
  • Avoid significant capital investment in a
    facility we occupy at the discretion of the
    County.
  • Avoid cost growth (and risk) for waste disposal
  • Service considerations
  • Expressed preference of residents
  • Convenience
  • Offering recycling to all residents
  • The option of improved public services for those
    who wish to use (and pay for) them

8
Additional Considerations
  • This collection system (transfer station and
    curbside) already exists and is well established.
  • The recommendation aggregates the buying power of
    people who have elected curbside. This will
    reduce their cost by about half.
  • More people can join curbside if they want, but
    they can do that today. Our recommendation
    preserves residents right to choose, but it
    saves them money regardless of the choice they
    make.
  • It is clear that residents are choosing existing
    curbside options at a higher cost rather than
    remaining with Town service. This is true even
    during the recession.

51 of residents opt out of Town service
The Town already has curbside service, residents
just pay more for it. Curbside isnt the real
question. The real question has been Should the
Town preserve the opportunity to use a transfer
station for everyone who would like to, while
helping all residents transfer station and
curbside save money?
9
The Selected Option Managing Solid Waste
Recycling
Can cut trash in half for each household
Transfer Station/Curbside with PAYT
Can increase recycling by 300 Recycling could
double for transfer station users, from 11 to
22, and go from zero to 22 for curbside users.
  • Services options remain the same for everyone.
  • Curbside users can remain curbside, but cut their
    cost in half.
  • Transfer station users continue to use the
    transfer station, but will avoid the fee
    increases associated with disposing of twice as
    much tonnage as necessary at an escalating rate.
  • Expect The Town sees an enormous increase in
    recycling
  • Current recyclers double their recycling.
  • Recycling service is provided to many people who
    dont have it today.

10
Pay-As-You-Throw A Proven Solution to
Dramatically Reduce Waste
Pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) programs, also called
unit-based or variable rate pricing, provide a
direct economic incentive for residents to reduce
waste. Under PAYT, households are charged for
waste collection based on the amount of waste
they throw away, in the same way they are charged
for electricity, gas, and other utilities.
  • Residential trash tonnage to landfills and
    incinerators is reduced.
  • Recycling rates correspondingly increase as
    landfill/incinerator tonnage decreases.
  • Residents experience little change in service.
  • Residents become increasingly satisfied as they
    understand the benefits of the program.

What are its effects?
What is PAYT?
U.S. EPA
Whether implemented at transfer stations or
curbside, PAYT is equally effective and
represents no real change to residents already
buying bags at stores.
11
Pay-As-You-ThrowCommon Concerns
  • PAYT has always faced objections, but it can be
    both simple and successful.
  • Residents may not want to (or be able to) use
    curbside collection.
  • They dont have to. They can continue taking
    their trash to the transfer station. Because
    they will generate less trash, they will pay less
    to do this than would otherwise be the case.
  • For curbside users, can PAYT work with automated
    carts?
  • Absolutely these programs are very successful.
  • Wont illegal dumping increase?
  • No. Studies show little or no increase in
    illegal dumping caused by PAYT.
  • Residents wont like it
  • EPA studiesand real-life experienceshow broad
    public support for PAYT programs.
  • Research shows that most pre-implementation
    concerns are significantly overestimatedand
    eliminatedonce a program is implemented.

12
Summary
  • The Board of Selectmen (4-1) and Finance
    Committee (8-2) support Option 3
  • Curbside pickup
  • One transfer station
  • PAYT to reduce costs and increase fairness
  • Hard-to-manage facility
  • Anticipated Impacts
  • Single stream recycling and pay as you throw will
    cut trash per resident by up to half, producing a
    savings of approximately 450,000 per year in tip
    fees _at_70/ton.
  • Choice is preserved, recycling is dramatically
    expanded, and residents will save money compared
    to the other options available to them.

13
Appendix A
  • Assumptions

14
Curbside Assumptions
  • Curbside
  • Households Serviced 10,000 gradually
    increasing to 18,000 in year 7 of a 10 year
    contract
  • New Tipping Fee Starting at 65 per ton in 2015
    and increasing every year by 5 to a max of 100
    per ton
  • Disposal Tons decreasing 10 annually from 1.29
    to .79 per household due to single stream
    recycling a 40 overall decrease
  • Curbside Contract Escalator 3
  • Budget Multiplier 2.5 for Costs to Provide
    Program
  • PAYT Bags Price is designed to cover the cost
    of the bag and the tipping fee therefore starts
    out at 1.25 per 30 gallon bag with 2 incremental
    increases in the 10 year period up to 1.75 per
    bag.

Source Town of Plymouth, Department of Public
Works
15
Transfer Station Assumptions
  • Transfer Station
  • Households Decreasing based on historical
    trends from 5,000 to 3,894 over the 10 year
    period
  • New Tipping Fee Starting at 65 per ton in 2015
    and increasing every year by 5 to a max of 100
    per ton
  • Disposal Tons decreasing 10 annually from 1.29
    to .79 per household due to recycling a 40
    overall decrease verage User
  • Recycling Revenues will increase based on
    Increased Recycling
  • Budget Multiplier 2.5 for Costs to provide
    Transfer Station
  • PAYT Bags Price is designed to cover the cost
    of the bag and the tipping fee therefore starts
    out at 1.25 per 30 gallon bag with 2 incremental
    increases in the 10 year period up to 1.75 per
    bag.

Source Town of Plymouth, Department of Public
Works
16
Appendix B
  • Financials

17
ARTICLE 7D-Solid Waste Budget
  • OPTION 3-FY14 Budget 2,346,523
  • 3 Stations ½ year- 685,201
  • 1 Station ½ year- 375,070
  • Curbside ½ year- 968,896
  • Hard to Manage- 317,356
  • Total 2,346,523

Source Town of Plymouth, Department of Public
Works
18
Solid Waste Options Pay As You Throw
  • Option 1-FY14 Budget1,642,920.00
  • Flat fee-43/year
  • Average User-179/year
  • Option 3-FY14 Budget2,346,523.00
  • Flat fee, Transfer Stations-48/year
  • Average User, Transfer Station-179
  • Flat fee, Curbside-73/year
  • Average User, Curbside-210
  • Note that costs will escalate further and faster
    under Option 1, as more trash will be generated
    at triple the tipping fee

Source Town of Plymouth, Department of Public
Works
19
Appendix C
  • About Pay As You Throw

20
Does It Work? Real-Life Success Stories
  • PAYT results are immediate
  • and long lasting



Malden Oct. 2008-June 2009 Monthly Pounds Per
Capita Residential Solid Waste Tonnage
Worcester 1986-2008 Annual Pounds Per Capita
Residential Solid Waste Tonnage
Program Initiation
Program Initiation
Monthly PPC
Annual PPC
Source 1986-2003 - City of Worcester
2004-2008 Mass. DEP
Source 2007- 2009 - City of Malden
  • The savings begin immediately and continue well
    beyond the foreseeable future.
About PowerShow.com