December 20, 2000






PRESENT:           Mr. William McDevitt, Ms. Deb Casey, Mr. Greg Farris; Mr. Harold Lynde


Also present:       Mr. James Pitts, Town Administrator, members of the press and general public.


ABSENT:             Mr. James Hardy


Chairman McDevitt opened the meeting at approximately 8:00 pm.



Waste Management Proposal


Ms. Casey began by explaining what was discussed with waste management.  She said they went back to the original proposal, which was to go off the right-hand side and cut a hole in the building.  The compaction unit would be inside the building and the trailer on the outside.  She said there would be a retaining wall along the right-hand side so the trailer could be backed up to the building.  She said a 4’ wide conveyor belt could be added so that the windows could be utilized.


Mr. Farris said if the trailer were to be filled, the trash would be able to be used for overfill.  Ms. Casey said yes and explained that the compaction unit would be slightly lower than the conveyor so that the trash could slide into it easily.  She also noted that four windows would also be open. 


Mr. Farris asked what would happen if the compactor failed.  He then suggested that it be designed so that a free arm would swing over and close off the compactor.  He added that the trash could go onto the floor.  Mr. McDevitt said that furniture could also go into the compactor.


Ms. Casey informed that the compactor quote was $28,000 and the conveyor belt (4’ x 30’) would be a little over $16,600.  She said the hopper was 90” wide.  She then reviewed the bid proposals.  She reviewed the 75 yard pricing structure.  She said the haul rate was $265 and the disposal rate was $69.  She said the average amount would be 23 tons therefore the cost would be $83.76 per ton.  She also informed that the fuel surcharge ran between 1.1 to 2.6 this year.   Ms. Casey said that the cost would be approximately $13 lower per ton today.  She said if  100 yard pricing was used it would cost $80.52 per ton.   She said if a flat fuel surcharge was used, the haul rate would be increased to $310 per ton and the disposal rate would be $69 per ton.  She suggested not proceeding with the flat surcharge.  She said she hasn’t negotiated with them yet.


Ms. Casey said Waste Management was willing to sign a three year deal with a 4% increase per year from the first haul date. 


Ms. Casey reviewed the quote for the concrete pad and retaining wall.  She said the spring construction would cost $49,000 and the winter construction would cost $51,000 (the higher cost was due to curing the concrete)


Ms. Casey then reviewed the quote for the 4’ x 30’ conveyor belt which would cover four windows.  She said the belt would cost $16,375, the compactor and the 90” x 72” hopper would cost $28,000.  She informed that one 75 yard trailer could be leased for $786 per month for five years or two 75 yard trailers could be leased for $15,728 for five years.   Mr. Pitts said that originally he wanted to buy used trailers, but they weren’t available.  Ms. Casey said the cost to lease the compaction unit would be $542.92 per month.  Mr. Farris asked if at the end of a year it could be purchased.  Ms. Casey said she would discuss it with Mr. McGuire.  She said if the decision was to purchase the 75 yard trailer, one would cost $37,000 and two would cost $74,000. 


A comparison of a 75 yard versus a 100 yard trailer was discussed.  Ms. Casey said she didn’t have the numbers for a 100 yard trailer, but could get them. 


Ms. Casey gave the number for the last bid, which was from a general contractor.  She informed that it would cost $332,000 for the original plan submitted.  Mr. McDevitt noted that the number didn’t include engineering and contingencies.


Mr. Lynde said he still leans toward a non-compacted open top container.  He sited numbers that he had calculated.  He didn’t feel that there was a penalty paid by not compacting.  Ms. Casey disagreed.  She felt compaction was cleaner and more people could utilize the facility by having windows.  Mr. McDevitt added that Mr. Craig Musselman and Waste Management didn’t recommend.  Mr. Farris noted that an open top container would need a cover.  Mr. Pitts pointed out that a conveyor belt would give the opportunity to stop trash from entering the hopper if it’s not appropriate.


Mr. Farris asked if the pad where the container sits would have some sort of containment for leakage.  Ms. Casey said it would leak on the concrete pad.  Mr. McDevitt said a solution would be to have a drain with a tank and dispose of the contents as hazardous waste.  Ms. Casey said there was still negotiating to do and felt the decision to be made was to move forward or to address the issue next year. 


Mr. Lynde asked if the Warrant Article money would get the Town what it needed.  Ms. Casey said that everything could be done that was set out to be done.  Mr. Farris said a rollover effect was needed to spend between now and the end of the year or to turn it back.  Mr. McDevitt said the removal of the incinerator was a bigger problem than believed.  He said that the original bid was $77,000 which included the removal of the incinerator and the structural conversion.  He noted that since then the bid could have $10,000 taken off due to less items needing removal.  Ms. Casey added that they would still have to apply for the grant, which would be 20%.


Mr. Lynde suggested preparing a Warrant Article for the balance to be used to complete other aspects of the job.  Ms. Casey agreed.


Mr. Farris brought up the fact that the building wasn’t big enough for recycling.  Mr. McDevitt said ultimately another building could be connected on the left of the existing building.  Mr. Farris said he would like to see the traffic pattern maintained and would rather see a bigger building in the area the recycling is now. 


The Board reviewed the numbers discussed, and came up with a total of $125,000 for the conveyor, compactor, trailers and contingencies.  Mr. Farris began forming a motion.  He wanted to use for a year and then decide to purchase or not.  Mr. Lynde agreed with leasing because he was still unsure if compacting was the way to go.  Ms. Casey recommended that the compaction unit be purchased and the trailers be leased.  She also felt that there should be a 30% contingency on building which would total 129,607. 


Mr. Lynde asked if a driveway was needed behind the incinerator.  Ms. Casey said there were still items needed to be discussed.  Mr. Farris said that with his calculations there was $30,000 for contingencies.  Mr. McDevitt suggested that a Warrant Article be drafted to put the balance aside for the purposes of closing and removing the incinerator, etc.  but the money would come from the fund balance, therefore no additional taxes would be needed.  Mr. Farris’ concern was the number for taking the incinerator down because there was no current plan.  Mr. Lynde noted the possibility of using the balance from the $315,000 for closing the building and engineering the next stage.  Mr. Pitts said currently the remaining balance was $269,366.  Mr. McDevitt said he would work on drafting the Warrant Article. 



MOTION:           (Farris/Casey) To commit $125,000 from the existing Warrant Article for the purposes of:                               a) constructing a floor pad and retaining wall to accommodate a 100’ trailer;

                              b) to purchase a 4’ x 30’ conveyor belt for inside the existing incinerator building;

                              c) $7,140 provided for the lease of a 545XHD-D compactor;

                              d) $18,870 budgeted for two 75’ trailers leasing for one year;

                              e) contingency money of approximately $30,000 for additional costs of two 100 yard                                       containers, providing the 100 yard container pad, and any unforeseen expenditures.


VOTE:                 (4 - 0 - 0) The motion carries. 


Ms. Casey asked the Board for the authority to work on the roll-off prices so that accurate numbers could be provided.  She confirmed that the Board didn’t want the flat fee surcharge in the agreement.  There was a discussion in which it was decided that Ms. Casey would find out the following information: 1) height of the retaining wall; 2) start and finish dates; 3) cost for the 100’ trailer; 4) is cost of driveway and knockout for the wall included; 5) an arm for the conveyor belt; 6) how trash would be protected from falling to other side.  




MOTION:           (Lynde/Casey) To adjourn the meeting.


VOTE:                 (4 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.


The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:00 pm.


                                                                                          Respectfully submitted,


                                                                                          Charity A. L. Willis

                                                                                          Recording Secretary