HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-04-18-BOS-min Sod
SELECTMEN'S MEETING
APRIL 18, 1979
A regular meeting of the Board of Selectmen was held in the Select-
men's meeting room on Wednesday, April 18, 1979, at 7 30 p m Chairman
Battin, Mr Buse, Mrs Miley, Mr Kent and Mr Crain; Mr Hutchinson,
Town Manager; Mrs. Banks, Assistant to the Town Manager; Mrs McCurdy,
Executive Clerk, were present
The Solid Waste Advisory Committee, the Appropriation Committee, Solid
the Capital Expenditures Committee, and Mr Bruce Pollock, Manager's Waste
staff, met with the Board Report
Mr Hutchinson said that the report on solid waste has been filed
and constructive questions have been raised by various interest groups
who are conducting independent studies by running their own figures
about budget costs vs economic costs, and recycling vs non-recycling
Looking at the costs we have received regarding a "mandatory recycling
program," which he envisioned as viable only through trash collection,
he recommended the Board's consideration of including $244,000 in the
budget, based on the bids received In this report, we have the over-
riding issue of giving the Board of Selectmen the right to make a com-
mitment of its tonnage to a resource recovery facility, and the only
immediate economic alternative is going to be the Northeast facility
proposed for construction by UOP, Inc in North Andover At this time,
there is only one existing resource recovery facility in the State and
that is in Saugus; UOP is the next proposal, which is based on a com-
mitment of tonnage; 128 West has just received proposals and as the
information comes in, we can make that available to the Selectmen
The long-range solution would give the Selectmen the right to commit
the town's tonnage to whatever facility is in the best interests of
the town in the near future, based on the deadlines placed upon us by
the State, and in our opinion that decision would be for UOP and the
Northeast facility Certain decisions have to be made about mandatory
recycling because the Town Meeting requested that a mandatory recycling
proposal be brought forward Mr Hutchinson recommended not having
mandatory recycling as he felt that people are not ready to participate
in it, but to continue with a recycling program under the trash collection
system There are economic and budget costs addressed in the report re-
lating to that He would strongly counsel against a recycling program
as recommended by people at the last Town Meeting, which calls for the
administration literally stopping people at the landfill and having them
open their trash; this is not enforceable and almost impossible to admin-
istrate
I
scdi
Selectmen's Meeting - 2 - April 18, 1979
Mr Hutchinson said that the recommendation is predicated on the
continued operation of the landfill and we are working on an operating
closure plan with Whitman & Howard to look at how much time we have
left at the landfill From where we are now and working out to the
shed, we have 1+ year left; going out to Hartwell Avenue, consistent
with state guidelines, we would hopefully have two to three years
and tie in with any long range solution the town embarks upon
Tomorrow evening, we are going to a meeting in North Andover on
costs and al+.neview of progress with other communities
Mr Buse said he realized we would have to go to trash pickup
and at some point in time the dump would be closed, but we should not do
it until we have a time certain to go to North Andover and close the
dump If we have three years, we -ehouldk_have €hxge years of the same
participation as it would cost the town money It would not be cost
effective. A figure not in the report was the "buy back" of the
garbage contratract, which is 15 percent of the contract for the
first year and 10 percent for the following year Also, there is no
provision for businessmen's trash; they are a large part of the tax-
payers
ax-
a ers and some cansidezation should be
P Y given to them. He would not c
support it this year, and next year he would look at it again cti
Mr Hutchinson's answers to Mr Kent's questions were ✓ Ji °`
1 The low bidder proposed pickup on Tuesday, Wednesday,
and Thursday If people miss the pickup, they may go
to the landfill
2 Solid waste in one bag or in three separate compart-
ments; it is assumed garbage would be wrapped; up to
six bags curbside
3 Garbage containers are not to be serviced
4 The program is designed to keep the landfill open
five days a week
Mr Hutchinson gave information on UOP The main plant is in
Chicago, with other plants in Harrisburg, Europe and Japan Itnis
a German system called the Martin System, which is a conversion of
steam to electricity
Mr Bailey, Solid Waste Committee, said that the one thing
that convinced him was that the UOP process has no intermediate
stage; it goes from trash to electricity out UOP has demonstrated
in the European plants that they can do it and can do it here by
transferring the technology and causing it to come off successfully
by making allowances for the quite different heat values in the
trash we generate here
Resco was not recommended by the Manager and the Solid Waste
Committee, (a) the plant is not prepared to handle American waste
or the high intensity of the heat which is generated; (b) It is
too expensive-$15/ton just to take the rubbish; Lexington would
have transportation costs; non-controllable escalation factor;
Mr Reilly, Chairman of Solid Waste Committee, said that the
basic point of discussion is the commitment to the resource recov-
ery facility
r
597
Selectmen's Meeting - 3 - April 18, 1979
I
Mr Hutchinson said that UOP would build a plant for 1800-3000 tans
a day and they are talking about dealing with towns in New Hampshire,
this region, and others
Mr White, Chairman of the Appropriation Committee, said that it
would take about 32 towns besides Lexington to support it if you fig-
ure 56 tons a day from Lexington. If 6 towns were reasonably, close
and others were considering the proposal, how realistic is the June 30
deadline?
Mr Hutchinson replied that it isn't that realistic and he could
not tell him they are going to have 32 towns by July 1 We are recom-
mending that we be one of the first and the Selectmen be given the
capacity to make that decision It is a very complex issue and we
are going to give Town Meeting eerything that we can before you give
that decision
Titiaths-that are ready to sign would have 350-400 tons; towns with
warrant articles for commitment would add another 950 tons, and the hard
cell towns would bring it over the top The agreement would be for a
20-year commitment with a guarantee of a certain tonnage, with a fixed
cost tied to the consumer price index
Mr Busa said that the consumer price index would be over 8 percent
this year and can escalate as much as 15 percent We should come up
with a 1-year contract with some means of escalation other than the
111 consumer price index
Mr Crain said that the consumer price index is broken into com-
ponents and, in negotiations, he hoped we could agree on the relation-
ship of a reasonable lead time to components related to the facility,
not the total index
Mr Hutchinson said this is one of the issues that is being ad-
dressed right now and could be pursued further with UOP at Town Meeting
Mr White said that the major concern is net costs and we don't
have a handle on net costs for FY 80 We are trying to see what the
realistic impact on the tax rate will be, and it looks like $159,000
Mr Hutchinson said this is the only proven technology at this time
and nobody has come up with anything In the interim, you have a problem
that has to be resolved
Mr. Bailey added that they don't see anything happening for the
next 10-15 years Ta_answer Mr White's question if an escape clause
could be built in, the key thing is in order for financing to be re-
ceived, UOP has to have some long term commitments; if you have leaky
agreements, they are going to have trouble getting financing
Discussion was held on the $80,000 piece of DPW equipment in-
cluded in the budget figures and the garbage collection figure of
$72,000 Mr Hutchinson said that the proposal is to pick up garbage
as part of curbside collection His recommendation to the Board is
to put in $244,000 (new money) and he did not touch the $72,000
because of the variable of whether this would even be approved by
the Town Meeting
‘d8
Selectmen's Meeting - 4 - April 18, 1979
Mr Cataldo, Appropriation Committee, asked questions about the
difference in the present operation and the proposal, and Mr Pollock
answered his questions by a breakdown of FY 79 costs for the solid
waste disposal program-$325,170, and future disposal system options
and cost estimates-$258,000 ($244,000 plus $14,000 penalty), which
did not include $72,000 for garbage collection. The proposal in-
cludes all residential dwellings of 4 units or below; does not in-
clude apartments or condominiums; once a week mixed garbage pickup.
Housing for the elderly/public facilities are referenced for pickup
and the Manager has the right under the contract to expand services
to certain areas,with the approval of the Board of Selectmen
In response to Mr Cataldo's question if any bids were taken
including commercial pickup, Mr Hutchinson said there were none;
we designed the specifications based on practice in most communities
Mr Cataldo said that businesses would pay 24 percent and get
nothing They would be willing to pay their share to have it picked
up like everybody else; commercial people should not be excluded
The Manager is to get a figure for including commercials and
information on what other communities do
Mr Busa asked for figures to pick up trash in Lexington as long
as the landfill is open
Mr Karsten Sorenson, Vinebrook Road, presented alternate pro-
posals and requested that the Board seriously consider a program of
dropping the curbside pickup of recyclables and go into a mandatory
separation system at the sanitary landfill If the article is voted, 111
you are locked in for 20 years He did not agree with the Town Manager
and said that people realize there is a real savings of $300,000 if you
get BO percent participation, as Marblehead does
Mrs Miley painted out that Marblehead is saying they have 50 per-
cent participation She did not agree with Mr Sorenson's recommenda-
tion for individual companies that pick up around the town to be charged
an extra fee if they chose not to recycle; if so, it would be expected
that any citizen who did not choose to recycle would be charged Then,
it would almost get out of hand
The Board agreed to discuss with the Town Moderator the possibility
of recessing a Town Meeting session for an informal dialogue, and then
vote on solid waste at the next session
The Solid Waste Committee, Appropriation Committee, Capital Expendi-
tures Committee, and Mr Pollock retired from the meeting
Mr Peter DiMatteo, .Btii±dingttComAdssioner, met with the Board to
discuss Article 57-Drainage By-Law Mr Busa expressed his reservations
about the Article, (1) the authority giving the Building Commissioner
the latitude to come up with a solution for drainage for each individual,
whether builder or resident of the town, is too broad and, in his opinion,
would only create problems for the town and the Building Commissioner, as
he is the person making the judgment of how the drainage would be solved
on each individual parcel of land or subdivision in the town; (2) there is
no cut specification of what the drainage program would be He knew of
other towns that have a similar by-law and it becomes very sticky and
111
very argumentative, and the only solution for the homeowner dr developer
is the court or the Board of Appeals In talking with Town Counsel, the
possibility is to go to the Board of Appeals He had full faith in Mr
DiMatteo but if he should leave we might have one who is not sensitive
to the problems Once an alteration is made in a piece of property,
X09
Selectmen's Meeting - 5 - April 18, 1979
a situation for to solve a drainage robkem.
teat n the Building Commissioner g p
In the construction of a home, you should have X number of degrees of
runoff from the foundation to the property line. If you are near a
catch basin, you can run off to a catch basis If a slope is greater
than a certain percentage, dry wells of some size should be constructed
or a swale should be constructed to run into a catch basin, to the edge
of the road, to something There is nothing specific and there should
be specifications for people to look at
Mr DiMatteo said that the telephone calls on water problems with
faulty basements, improper grading, etc are quite substantial and there
is nothing I can do as it is a civil matter and the great expense to tax-
payers can be a problem. The building code is limiting to me in the
jurisdiction of what I can do During the construction procedures, I
can regulate how water is affecting the abutters but as soon as that
construction is finished and they put in the lawn and seed, I have no
control over how they grade the property, what they do to the abutters,
etc Mr Busa's concerns are well taken but I keep getting calls to
protect the homeowners I think the by-law could be workable, and if
my.'successor is not reasonable, then the by-law could always be revoked
Mr Crain asked for information on other communities; whether there
was such an article and whether it had been withdrawn
Mr DiMatteo said that he couldn't find communities that did have
it but he would work on it and get the information to the Board
Mr Busa felt that something could be worked into an article to
give the guidelines
Mr Hutchinson agreed that todhave the information for the Board
Mr DiMatteo retired from the meeting
The Board approved Mr Hutchinson's recommendations, as follows
Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted4to award Contract Contract
478-5-E to the lowest bidder, Crowlet Associates, Inc of Leominster #78-5-E
for sanitary sewer construction in the amount of $346,910 00, subject Sewer
to the approval of Town Counsel as to bid form
Mr Crain abstained because of a personal relationship
Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve an Contract
increase from $409,750 00 to $455,000 00 for Contract #77-5-E, awarded #77-5-E
to JFP Construction, Inc , Littleton, for sanitary sewer construction
in various locations, as authorized under Article 19 of 1978-sewer
bonding
Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the Symmes
request of the Symmes Hospital Community Relations Department to con- Road Race
duct "Run for Symmes" races on Saturday, May 12, 1979, with a rain
date of May 13, from the Arlington Heights line to Tower Park from
9 00 a.m to 3 00 p.m , as outlined in a letter of April 12, subject
to the regulations of the Police, Public Works Department, and the
Fire Department
Sf4
Selectmen's Meeting - 6 - April 18, 1979
motion duly y made and seconded, it was voted 5e0 by roll call
vote eMrs Bastin, Mr Busa, Mrs Miley, Mr Kent and Mr Crain -
to go into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing real estate
negotiations and litigation.
After discussion, it was voted to go out of Executive Session
Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn at
11 26 pm
A true record, Attest
E ecutive Clerk, Selectmen
I