Trash Collection -Points to Ponder

[guest 2]

Here are some thoughts to be considered in regard to township trash collection.
1.Will the mandated collection process, if twice a week, have an impact on recycling? i.e. Why recycle if we have so much extra trash capability?
2. At present a fair number of senior citizens share garbage collections with their neighbors inorder to conseve on cost and due to the fact they generate a very small amount of trash.
3. Basing the trash fee on the value of someone's home is a huge disservice to them. The fee should in all fairness be based on use.
4. Numerous parcels in town generate zero trash[lots,garages on single lotsetc. ]how would a fee based on property value be fair to them?
5. Many properties in town have both a residence and a business attached. The business and the property both use the same contracted dumpster. Charging them a trash fee based on their property value would be most unfair.
6. The agricultural community with farm assessed properties generate farm waste that is removed by dumpsters that are contracted for by the farmer. Although most of those farm properties have a residence, their domestic waste still goes into the common dumpster. To assess them a fee based on their property value is most unfair and just another tax.
6. This trash collection idea needs to be listed as an agenda item so that before the committee establishes a position on this, the entire town can be well informed and make an educated decision. At this point very few people in town are aware of this proposed change. This should be listed separately on the agenda and not as reports from committee members.

[Guest]

1. I get trash pick-up twice a week and would be extremely unhappy to go to once a week. I would either need two cans, which would waste more space in my garage, or I would be forced to add bags beside the can each week for which I would probably be charged a premium. Also, once-a-week pick-up would be a disaster during snow season. Even with twice-a-week we went 2 weeks between pick-ups at one point because of sequential snow/road issues on each of our pick-up days three times in a row. All you need is two snow falls in a row on the subsequent once-a-week pick-up days to end up waiting 3 weeks between trash collection. And you’d still pay the full price.

2. My tax assessment is 3X the township average. Why should I pay 3X for trash pick-up as the average resident? I’m already subsidizing them in other ways.

3. I like being able to competitively bid my trash pick-up provider. I had lived in numerous places where it was a local monopoly with a city contract and none were as reliable as I have here where competition and capitalism are at work.

4. Currently by allowing individual contracting, people can chose the service that makes the most sense for them. Some do once-a-week, others twice-a-week. Some have dumpsters because of their farm or business. Etc. Why take away all the efficiency of that choice?

5. All this is supposedly for cost savings. I don’t feel I pay too much now. In fact, I pay less than I did in previous cities when it was city contracts. Perhaps on paper it would initially be a savings here, but how much and for how long?

[Tony Soprano]

Aw Comawn Cranbury we will give youss a great deal if you let us pick up awl the trash for the wholes town.

Then when yous go to renew the deals we will be sure it is still fair. Trusts me, comwan. Its not like me and my other friends in the waste disposal busziness will colludes and forces your rates to go ways up once we have you alls in one town contract.

Trust me things likes this never happen in New Joisey.

This is a good deal $$$ so you better take it

[Guest]

It was an agenda item to put it to referendum in November. So we the voters (and yes those who support it too) can vote.

I pay a lot in taxes much higher then the average, but I don't get how one can say they are unwilling to save money if it means their neighbor pays less. If I pay $500 and they pay $200, but I still save $100 on my bill from the private collection then it would a waste for me to not want a town contract. I don't think I'll ever make enough where I can just throw away $100.00 and am amazed at those who can.

What good is choice if choice costs us more money then having the town contract? I had major billing problems, what did it get me 800 auto-mated problems. Then when I got a live person on the line it was oh yea we sent you a notice and you did not respond.

I agree there are a lot of details and we need to see the costs shown.

[Guest]

[numbers?]

I agree that we need to see numbers first.
This discussion reminds me of the re-assessment, where everyone said it will come out the same, no numbers were shown beforehand and then we all got hit with significantly higher property taxes.

It strikes me as strange to bring this up in the TC without presenting approximate numbers. Was this discussed because of some gut feeling that the cost might eventually be lower?

I like the possibility to negotiate a collection schedule and pay accordingly.

[Guest]

[Guest 2]

[numbers?]

The re-assessment was done at the peak of the housing bubble. At that time the residential values had increased much more than the commercial values, which shifted the burden towards the residential side . So mathematically, the residents pay more than before.
My tax went up by 60%.

But that is not my point. I would this time like to see numbers BEFORE decisions are made.

[Guest]

I may be wrong, but I think there are requirements when one does a referendum to have it agreed to go on the ballott by a certain period of time. That may mean there was not enough time to do all the research by now. I do know from speaking with a TC member that the average indicative cost prior to the discussion for referendum would be 200 per home. Then that cost would be put into the tax rate.

If that is the case then all they have done is say we're putting it before the voters which IMO is a good thing considering the mixed views here and even between me and others and in town. I would hope that final costs and schedule would be clear before the voters have to say yes or no.

If there is a proposal, service and estimated cost then I would only hope that the TC carries forward with the desire of the view of the voters and not act on personal opinion pro or con. If the voters say no it should drop. If they say yes it should proceed.

[Guest]

Another thing to consider. Governor Christie is pushing hard for an initiative to cap annual local tax increases at 2.5%. This would be absolute and not take into account reasons for the increase such as a loss of tax base do to re-assessments, reductions in state funding (like this year), new unfunded state mandated programs like our school is saddled with, etc. So anything we do that is added to our tax burden cuts into the very small margin of error we have to address these other ways our tax rate can be affected.

[Guest]