Council Seeks Proposals from Waste Haulers

Report on the Meeting of the Amherst Town Council, September 9, 2024, Part 1

This meeting was held in hybrid format and was recorded. It can be viewed here.

Present
Lynn Griesemer (President, District 2), Mandi Jo Hanneke, Andy Steinberg, Ellisha Walker (at large), Freke Ette and Cathy Schoen (District 1), Pat DeAngelis (District 2), George Ryan and Hala Lord (District 3), Pam Rooney and Jennifer Taub (District 4), and Ana Devlin Gauthier (District 5). Absent: Bob Hegner (District 5)

Staff: Dave Ziomek (Assistant Town Manager) and Athena O’Keeffe (Clerk of the Council)

Town Services and Outreach Committee Recommends Waste Hauler Bylaw
The Town Services and Outreach (TSO) Committee has been working on changing the Waste Hauler bylaw for two years, and has finally come to the conclusion that the town needs more information from local haulers about the available services and cost. To that end, TSO recommended unanimously that the town issue a request for proposals (RFP) to haulers. The committee understands that the Town Manager will need to hire a consultant to craft the RFP, and that the council will need to authorize the funds for the consultant.

George Ryan (District 3) presented the proposed new Waste Hauler bylaw, (3.33) , now called Refuse Collection and Recyclable Materials bylaw. The three main elements of the proposed bylaw are: town contracted services to encourage competitive bidding, pay-as-you-throw pricing to incentivize reducing trash volume, and curbside composting to prevent organics from entering landfills. This proposal was first introduced in 2017 by Zero Waste Amherst and has been endorsed by dozens of local organizations, including the Board of Health. It was also listed as a goal for the Town Manager for the past two years.

Ryan outlined Amherst’s efforts to combat climate change by reducing the use of harmful materials. Amherst banned Styrofoam in 2012 and single use plastic in 2016. In 2021, the council adopted the Climate Action, Adaptation, and Resilience Plan. This plan is the result of the town being awarded a Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) grant to develop a proposal for waste reduction in 2020. Ryan said this proposal is the next step in reducing greenhouse gas-producing organic materials in the landfill through universal curbside composting, a practice already in place in many other municipalities, such as New York City, Seattle, Somerville, and most of California. Amherst’s program would begin with residences of one to four units, with phasing in of larger buildings and businesses. 

Although the basic points of the proposal have been developed, many questions remain, most of which require input from haulers. Among these uncertainties: Who will handle complaints and customer service, how would the fee structure be handled, what will be the role of the transfer station, and what will be the cost to the residents and the town. Currently, individual households contract directly with USA Waste and Recycling for waste hauling and recycling. USA offers biweekly compost pickup for an additional $15 per month, but does not advertise this option. Residents also have an option of purchasing a $125 sticker from the town and buying bags to bring their trash and recycling to the transfer station themselves.

According to the timeline submitted to the council by TSO, the new provisions would go into effect in July, 2026.

Council Discussion of TSO Motion to Issue RFP
TSO voted unanimously “To advise the Town Manager to issue an RFP on behalf of proposed General Bylaw 3.33, Refuse Collection and Recyclable Materials. The presentation and motion raised many questions from the council. Mandi Jo Hanneke (at large) asked how much hiring a consultant to write the RFP would cost the town. She also questioned why the proposal was starting with small households, rather than large apartment complexes, schools, and businesses which produce more waste.

Superintendent of Public Works Guilford Mooring estimated that a consultant to craft the RFP and to help with the new bylaw would cost about $50,000 to $75,000. TSO member and bylaw co-sponsor Jennifer Taub (District 4) noted that commercial establishments, including schools and colleges, already have a ban on disposal of organics in the waste stream, and Mooring thought that the state would extend the ban to single-family homes in the near future. TSO Chair Andy Steinberg (at large) pointed out that the committee thought it would be simplest to start with one to four-family buildings, since they currently contract with one hauler, as opposed to larger complexes that use several different companies. 

Pat DeAngelis (District 2) worried about the possible extra cost of composting for vulnerable residents and that landlords will pass additional costs on to tenants. The strongest opposition to the TSO motion was from Council President Lynn Griesemer (District 2) who wanted more outreach and community input before the RFP was issued. She suggested that the consultant work to create the bylaw as well as the RFP and that the timeline be revised to allow for the extra outreach. Without calling a vote on the original motion, she offered a substitute motion, seconded by Hanneke, that advised the Town Manager to propose a plan that includes the following and may include consultant services to identify the key features of a waste hauler program, conduct community outreach, develop a proposed bylaw, and implement a community education program.

This substitute motion raised many objections from the other councilors. Ellisha Walker (at large) asked how a second motion could be introduced without a vote being taken on the original and without the original proposer agreeing. Council Clerk Athena O’Keeffe termed Griesemer’s motion an “amendment by substitution” that replaced the original motion.

To this Ryan answered that TSO intends to begin extensive outreach as soon as possible, but the first question everyone wants to know is how much the new service will cost, and this can only be answered through an RFP.

Cathy Schoen (District 1) objected to tasking the consultant with developing the bylaw, since TSO has spent over two years on formulating the bylaw. Steinberg pointed out that the Town Manager would need to come to the council to allocate the funds for the consultant, so more questions about the role of the consultant could be answered then.

In the wake of this criticism, Griesemer withdrew her motion. Hanneke then broke the almost two-hour stalemate with a motion that added specificity to the original TSO motion. She proposed the following:

To advise the Town Manager to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) in accordance with the below goals, in anticipation of revising General Bylaw 3.33, Refuse Collection and Recyclable Materials: 

1. Town would negotiate and contract with a waste hauler or haulers on behalf of residents for collection of household trash, unlimited recyclables, and compostables 

2. The contract would include a robust pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) fee structure 

3. Curbside composting would be made available to all residents 

4. Transfer station could remain open but its role in the waste management program has yet to be determined 

5. Program would be phased in beginning with single family and 2-, 3-, and 4-unit properties, expanding to all residential properties within 3 years 

6. Haulers must provide an annual report to the Town on the weight, in tons, of trash, recyclables, and compostables collected within the Town. 

7. An advantage in awarding a contract would be given to haulers who dispose of compost locally

This motion passed 12-0 (1 absent). Griesemer withheld her vote until the rest of the councilors present voted in the affirmative. She then cast the final vote.

Public Comment Strongly in Favor of Waste Hauler Change
In the public comment portion of the meeting, former Board of Health Chair Nancy Gilbert, John Root, Maria Kopicki, Darcy DuMont, and Madeleine Charney spoke strongly in favor of the proposed waste hauler reform. Vince O’Connor wanted the composting to be available to renters in larger complexes as well. Only Jon Hite expressed the views put forward by Griesemer that the proposal should not move forward until more public education and input occurred.