Acton Climate Action Team

[ Home ] [ Acton PAYT FAQ ] [ News Archive ] [ The "2 days vs. 5 days" poll ] [ Life After NEWSC info ]

The "2 days vs. 5 days" Poll

(From Jim Snyder-Grant of the Acton Climate Action Team)

You can read through the whole thing, or jump from section to section via this table of contents.

Table Of Contents
Introduction
Questions (and some answers):
   2 days vs. 5
   Transfer Station Operations
   Pay As You Throw
Statements:
    In Favor of 5 Days
    In Favor of 2 Days
    Other schedule variants
    Transfer Station Operations
    Curbside
    Not in Favor of Pay As You Throw
    In Favor of Pay As You Throw
Thanks!
    

From Friday morning May 6th to Monday afternoon May 9th, I collected some information about Acton transfer station user preferences. The question was

Would you prefer:

Option 1:To pay an extra $15 per year for your transfer station sticker and have the transfer station be open 5 days a week

-or-

Option 2: To save that money and use the transfer station only on Wednesdays and Saturdays?

I collected some answers at the transfer station, and many more via an email that got forwarded around Acton, most notably via Beth Petr's and Charlie Kadlec's email lists. (The email text is here, as a Word file)

The response was huge, and very one-sided:

Of the 279 people who answered 2 days or 5,  88% said 5 days.   That's an amazingly high degree of unanimity for a question that involves a trade-off between money and convenience.

People also wrote a lot, with statements and questions.

People asked a lot of excellent questions and raised a lot of concerns. I've paraphrased most of them, and tried to supply answers, here.

And people had a lot to say. I quote from a variety of responses, covering a wide range of views, here

Questions, and some answers:

2 days vs. 5

How can only $15 make the difference between 2 days and 5?

Most of the cost of running the transfer station is trash disposal costs. Labor is a distant second. Changing the number of days adds some labor costs, but it only changes the overall costs a bit.

Why 2 days, why not 3, or 4?

Once we go over 2 days, the town will have full-time workers. With full-time workers, we might as well keep it open full-time - operating only 3 or 4 days won't cost significantly less than 5 days.

Is the $15 additional for 5 days for senior stickers as well?

No, the calculations assume that only full-price stickers increase. Some seniors did suggest that they would be willing to have their sticker price go up to support a 5-day operation.

Will the $15 be charged to all taxpayers, whether they use the transfer station or not?

No, the town calculations for 2006 and forward all assume that the transfer station is a self-sustaining operation - no money taken from or to the tax base.

I know there is concern on the part of some of the transfer station workers regarding their own employment but I thought the idea was they would work other duties?

No, the planned 2-day a week operation does involve some layoffs, and a switch from some full-time to part-time workers.

Has anyone analyzed whether 2 days is sufficient to service the demand?

About half the traffic is on Saturday, the rest distributed on the other days, with Friday being a bit more crowded than the other days. Thus, if the traffic from the cancelled days distributed evenly to Wednesday and Saturday, that would be a 37.5% increase in Saturday traffic, which would cause significant additional delays. I believe the hope is that much more of the traffic from the cancelled weekdays would be able to go on Wednesday, which would make Wednesday have approximately the same traffic as Saturday. There are obviously a lot of unknowns in figuring out how much extra congestion would be caused by going to 2 days.  

Didn't the selectmen say that the last override would provide level services to the town -- NO CUT IN SERVICES?  They have some explaining to do -- no one expected a cut in the transfer station hours.

Well, to be fair to the selectmen, this reduction in hours was in the town warrant. That doesn't mean that most people saw it, but it was in there.

Transfer station operations

Can't they do some work done at the transfer station to encourage / require more recycling and improve the traffic flow?

Yes, there is some work the town wants to do to rearrange the transfer station, make the recycling be easier to use and handicapped accessible, and more. They are going to prepare an application to the state to get permission to do this work. The town meeting authorized a big chunk of change from the NESWC stabilization fund to make these recycling and traffic flow improvements. 

Pay As You Throw (PAYT)

This Pay As You Throw thing - will I have to pay for recycling?

No, Pay As You Throw is designed to encourage recycling. There will continue to be no extra charge for recycling.

What about lawn clippings? I generate a lot of bags.

The compost operation will continue, as now, for free. Pay-Per-Bag is just about the trash that needs to be sent out to a dump or an incinerator.

What's all this about 'Hybrid' and 'Pure' and so on?

In a hybrid PAYT system there is both an annual fee and a per-bag trash fee. In a pure PAYT system there is no annual fee, only a per-bag fee

Do I have to pay when I  throw my trash away? Won't that be cumbersome and time consuming?

That would be cumbersome - but PAYT doesn't work that way. Instead, you will be able to buy special Acton bags of various sizes at your convenience at local stores.   Smaller bags will cost less. You choose which sizes make sense for you. At the transfer station, you will be able to throw away trash in any of the special bags.

Will it cost the town more to run a Pay As You Throw operation?

Generally, no. Towns typically see a 20-30% reduction in trash volume in a Pay As You Throw system. That saves a lot of money.  Labor costs may increase, depending on the type of PAYT system. Today at the transfer station, someone is needed to check stickers. In a pure pay as you throw system, that same person is needed to check bags, instead. In a hybrid system, you need a person for each of these jobs. So, in a hybrid system, there may a slight increase in costs if the trash reduction is not enough to pay for the second employee.

So why not do a pure Pay As You Throw system?

Well, a pure PAYT system might be the best in the long run. But the town is unsure how much trash transfer station customers generate in Acton, because the trash has been mixed with unweighed brokerage trash for many years. So the town is unable to calculate today how to price a pure PAYT system. The proposed hybrid system is being priced so that the stickers cover all the fixed costs & the per-bag fees cover the disposal costs, so that the town can break even no matter what the trash volumes are.

Will the special trash bags fit my cans?

The town is looking in to a variety of bag sizes to cover most standard trash can sizes.

Wouldn't it be better to charge by weight not volume? The town pays for disposal by weight not volume.

Theoretically, yes - and a few towns do. But the weighing systems either slow things down a lot, or are very expensive, or both. The price calculations are done using estimates from other towns and from the state about average weight per bag in PAYT systems. There will be a maximum weight per bag, probably printed right on the bag with other PAYT instructions, and the bags are designed to hold up to that weight - but not much more.

I'm not too keen on the idea of buying special bags. I would prefer buying stickers that we put on a bag.

There are towns that use stickers. Acton staff believes bags are a better option because they are easier and quicker to administer - it's much easier to see if someone is using a special town bag.

But using special bags - isn't that antithetical to our recycling and trash reduction goals?

Well, there is a certain irony there. But the bags are made out of recycled materials, and the bags add extremely little weight to the trash stream.

Wouldn't people be motivated to dump their trash on quiet woodsy streets?

After an adjustment period of a couple of months, where some extra enforcement attention might be needed, most towns have not encountered any noticable extra dumping. Acton already charges extra for bulky items, and we are not finding a lot of these in the woods.

Will the fees be going up AND we will pay by the bag? That's too much!

If the town chooses a pay-as-you-throw system, the base sticker price falls significantly. We have some sample prices from the town on our Pay As You Throw page.

Statements:

In favor of 5 days:

We use the transfer station, although primarily on Saturdays. The short two day schedule might not be a problem but it may make Saturdays more crowded. For that reason alone I would be willing to pay the $15 extra to stay open 5 days.

I've wondered what nitwit thought up those restricted hours and why.

I typically go only on Saturdays, but if 80% of the town is forced to go that day, too, it could become a real mess.

Even though I would likely not use days other than Saturday very often, I would gladly pay $15 to have the extra flexibility of Tuesday through Friday. I can see a lot of cases where one would want to hit the transfer station on Thursday or Friday on the way out of town for a long weekend during the summer months, not wanting to have the non-recyclables fermenting in the 90-degree garage until the following Saturday.

I am willing to pay an extra $15.00 per year for the transfer station to be open 5 days, because I can rarely predict when I will get the next opportunity to go there! Wednesdays and Saturdays are already pretty hectic for us; having to schedule the trash in on those days will be difficult.

For our family we would definitely prefer 5 days a week. I think if it were two there would be very long lines on those days and it would be so much more of a hassle to do a chore that we have problems getting to as it is!

I would be willing to pay an extra $15.00 per year for 5 day service. That's less the 30 cents a week. This is a no brainer. Besides, the lines on Saturday will be crazy.

It is a sad state when we have to pay more to keep it the same. However, it is certainly worthwhile to pay $15 more to keep the transfer station open 5 days a week.

If we go down to the 2 days per week, I would probably seriously consider going to a weekly pickup by a private company. The thought of having to fight the crowds on a Saturday with the rest of Acton would not be something that I would put up with.

Safety is an important reason for keeping the transfer station open 5 days per week. If open only two days per week, I think the volume of traffic on those days would overwhelm the capacity of the station to handle the flow. As a result, a line of cars would back up onto Rt 2 creating a serious traffic hazard. Also, the extra expense of gasoline used to wait in line would more than offset the extra $15 per year cost to keep the transfer station open 5 days per week.

I use the transfer station every week ( and sometimes twice a week) and my projection of long lines is based on my observation of traffic during the week, when I normally go, and traffic volume on Saturday, when I sometimes go. During the week there always is a steady flow of traffic, but seldom, if ever, a wait. On Saturday there is always a wait.

I currently go to the transfer station 4 to 5 times a week (I have almost no place to store trash in my garage...), and I would pay A LOT more than $15 to keep it open 5 days a week,

I'm a long time (since '77) resident at 30 Forest Road, corner of Forest and Minot. My vote would be for Option 1. as if it's reduced to Wednesdays and Saturdays the traffic on Forest Road will be unbearable. As it is we have to listen to a stream of noisy commercial vehicles on our road all day long. Some Saturdays I can barely get out of my driveway.

$15/week seems to be a fair price to pay to reduce potential lines at the transfer station, and the resultant increase in gasoline consumption, car exhaust from idling cars, and risk to cars needing to wait (potentially) on Route 2 for a chance to enter the transfer station property. One accident resulting in injury from the preceeding scenario is too great a price to pay.

I work a 12 hour shift every Wednesday, and often on Saturdays, so this new schedule is terrible for me!

It might also save quite a number of people's jobs and benefits.

In favor of 2 days:

Since 99% of the time our family uses the transfer station on Saturdays, I guess I don’t much care about going to a 2-day a week schedule. The one day I did try to go mid-week, I got there after 4 only to learn that it closes for the weekday at 3 p.m.!, so had to run around with the trash in my car an extra day.

In response to your question, I'd say that since I work 5 days/week I can only use the transfer station on Saturday anyway, and so apart from making the wait at the trash building much longer there would be no real benefit to me in keeping the transfer station open 5 days/week. So I'd vote for option 2, the less expensive option.

I've never been to the transfer station on a day other than Saturday, ever. So, extra money for longer hours does not make sense to me.

I'd vote for the 2-day option. I always go Wednesday anyway!

I'm happy to do a two day opening for the transfer station. It's not so much the money, as it is the idea that the transfer station wouldn't be running all week, an unintended environmental benefit. Or maybe not so unintended... ;-)

We are Saturday-only users of the transfer station, and are therefore in favor of saving the $42,000 and going to a 2-day-per-week operation. The present hours do not allow us to use it at other times.

I'm flexible - so I 'd go with the Wed/Sat option and save the $15

Other variants on schedule:

As to the two day vs. five day opening of the transfer station, I think that most people could work around the two day opening if the hours on Wednesday matched the hours you have for Saturday (7-4). If that is not possible, I think the small increase of $15 per year in order to open more days would be acceptable to most residents.

If we’re going to a two-day schedule, it would be nice if it stayed open as long as it does on a Saturday!.

If you go with a 2 day option, I would consider TH and SAT instead of Wed's given that many families are home earlier on TH's given that school in K-6 is a half day. This often for me makes TH's a more convenient day to get to the transfer station.

As long as the transfer station is open until 4 pm on Wednesdays and Fridays, 2 days a week is preferable to 5 days with an increase, for me.

How about four days a week with one night open til 7:00 P.M. in summer? 8 to 4 is great unless you have a normal 8 to 5 job

Other comments about transfer station operations

If the recycling is so much cheaper, we could move the sticker checking booth to past the recycling locations, and not charge for that. We might want to prevent out of towners in, but it might be a good symbolic change. We need a location to place tempting reusable items for others to take.

The plan to do something for 9 months sounds like a good idea to me. It'll give us more time to consider all of the available options.

Expand/improve on the recycling,  such as adding a give and take or swap shop area and book swap area

The purpose of trash disposal in Acton is to allow residents who have things they can no longer use, or don't need or want (whether banana peels, full diapers, empty food packaging, junk mail or old furniture) to move those items to the next step in their product life cycle. The goal should be to do so in the most sustainable way possible.

Would the town get a break on whatever liability insurance it has for giving public access to a dangerous area -- the scrap pile in particular?

I also think that the sticker price should be reduced not increased. My basis for having this opinion is twofold. First, the NESWC Enterprise Fund will have a ~$3,600,000 balance as of July 1st. This money was collected from sticker income, public subsidy, and profit from trash brokerage. The reason for not spending this money was that it was needed to cap the landfill. As you are aware, we are not required to pay to cap the landfill. Consequently, I believe that the money should be returned to the tax payers. What better way than to return it to support the activity that was the source of the money?    Second, analysis shows that continuation of the brokerage program, at least in the next year, will generate a profit to the Town. To do so requires that the Transfer Station be open five days. Whether or not we ultimately use the excess funds in the Enterprise Fund or not, I believe that the Transfer Station remain open.

I don't really care [about 2 days vs. 5] as long as the Transfer Station remains open period. I am terrified that they will close it and we will have no place to take our leaves and brush, and will have to pay exorbitant fees to private haulers to get rid of it! For us the Transfer Station is the lowest cost option, and the lowest cost option is the best!

Why can't we throw trash right into the dumpster instead of having the bulldozer pick it up and put it in the dumpster? This seems like a waste of time to me. Why do we have to have someone sit in that building? Why not use a card swipe to open a gate to allow residents in. Both of those situations cost a lot of labor dollars.

Comments about curbside

What I don’t want to see happen is mandatory curbside pick-up.

I'm in favor of curbside pickup for the entire town.

I am tired of hauling my trash to the dump. If we can get good reasonable service that has reputable recycling and a plan for handling odd items, then I may be ready for curbside PAYT and get out of spending my limited free time at the dump.

People hire private haulers because they are too busy to go to the dump, they don't want the bother of recycling, they have too much trash to put in the car (too many kids) or all of the above. These people will not go along with separating trash, bagging in separate bags, etc,, all of the bother of supporting that type of trash pickup. Check with Chelmsford, they tried it for a few year and abandoned it. So, added to the current fleet of trucks will be the towns hauler trucks. Net gain, not loss. Furthermore, I drive through Marlborough twice a day. They have town-wide trash pickup. There is trash all over the place because the crows rip the bags. It is always a mess on trash pickup day. Check with Burlington or Billerica, they had problems this past winter with storms, show plows, and trash pickup day all happening at once. Trash buckets were hit by plows, drivers wouldn't walk through the plow piles to pick up trash, etc,. Big brouhaha.

It would be better to have 100% curbside pickup. To be efficient, this should be organized so that no more than 2 companies drive down each street. (2 for competitive efficiency, no more to minimize fuel use.) The town should be put out to bid in "blocks". There should be no group of residents who individually drive to the dump a couple of times a month. (how wasteful of fuel and cars is that?)

We are also disenchanted with the curbside pickup; in our case, hauling a large container down approximately 200 feet of gravel driveway at all seasons, particularly for elderly folks, is not one action we would look forward to doing.

Concerned about Pay As You Throw

I am somewhat opposed to a pay-as-you-go scheme. I would prefer to have the full cost included in my tax bill. That way it is tax deductible.

The problem with any pay by the pound or bag system is that it is a regressive tax, taxing parents of infants and toddlers more heavily than others more able to pay. Also, those with more disposable income are more likely to be using curbside pickup. (I estimate about 70% of the town's households do now anyway) and they have no incentive to reduce trash stream or to use their economic ability to improve total waste stream associated with their consumption.

Without having studied the pay-as-you-throw in detail, it does not strick us that it is a win/win situation. If it entails keeping the transfer station open for 5 days a week, there are the town admin costs that are constant; it certainly involves many more components than the other choices - i.e., the merchant's requirements to keep the stock of bags, households having to add the purchase of bags to their tasks, and there is no more guarantee of bag cost not escalating any more than cost of town personnel or whatever. We suspect that if anybody has performed a detailed cost analysis of this option against others, we would not be prepared to bet the farm that it would come out on top.

As far as the PAYT, it seems like extra work having to use special size bags. Right now I just put things in a barrel or in small grocery bags.

In favor of Pay As You Throw

As for either a pay as you go at the transfer station or pay as you go curbside pick up, it is my understanding that the recycling program is at least a break even operation. I am hoping that Acton will continue to encourage recycling and keep the center operating. This incentive to recycle and drastically limiting your trash has merit. The more people are able to recycle and reduce the amount they pay to actually throw unrecyclable trash into the transfer station will increase recycling town wide. Many people don't take the time to separate their trash but if there is a monetary incentive I think more will. Everyone wins in this case-residents pay less to dispose of trash and the town gets more recycling to sell.

I'm all for PAYT being that we're big on composting/recycling.

I LOVE THE PAY AS YOU THROW IDEA!!

I'd also like to strongly endorse PAYT as a system for Acton, and would support even a trial hybrid version of the system that would allow the Town to determine the demand. I'm delighted to hear that such a system is on the table.

I am strongly in favor of a pay as you throw. I think that the main benefit is that people would be more conscious of recycling.

What I like about Pay As You Throw is that people who throw away less, pay less. That seems much more fair than the current system.

I like the pay as you throw idea -- a good reward for those doing the right thing.

I also favor a PAYG system or another way to encourage people to think about their trash. I'm not sure I can cut down too much on mine, but I definitely see behavior at the transfer station that would change if Acton's proposed
PAYG encourages recycling.

My thanks to everyone who took time to answer the poll & write responses. 

The Acton Climate Action team has more on Pay As You Throw and other Acton trash issues at http://www.actonclimate.org/payt.htm .