Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Councilman trashes proposal
|
| Julie Nicolov/Staff PhotoRon Moser loads trash into the back of a truck owned by Moser Bros. Sanitation, Mount Carmel, Tuesday. Leroy Moser, co-owner and borough councilman, is upset fellow council members have proposed a mandatory garbage- and recycling-removal program that would be contracted to a single waste hauler. |
| Share This Story: |
  
|
Proponents: Single refuse hauler needed in M.C.MOUNT CARMEL — A proposed mandatory recycling- and garbage-removal program sparked outrage from Mount Carmel Borough Councilmen Leroy “Chico” Moser during council’s work session Monday night.
Three fellow councilmen — Carl Froutz, Jack Williams and Robert Barrett — made the proposal on the advice of a consultant after learning the borough could lose out on $400,000 in state recycling funding it received two years ago. If so, it could also jeopardize future state appropriations of grant money.
Moser operates an independent waste hauling business. He believes the proposal unfairly targets his business and that of fellow waste haulers, and says there could be a better system.
“How could you take away my business that I built?” Moser, of Moser Bros. Sanitation, asked of his six fellow council members during a three-hour long work session. “There were other options.”
In order to seek compliance with state recycling regulations and to use the $400,000 grant that is nearly expired, the committee and consultant Michelle Nestor, of Nestor Resources Inc., proposed contracting with one single waste hauler to handle refuse and recycling in Mount Carmel.
Under the proposal, a flat fee would be imposed rather than customers paying by the bag, said Nestor, and will include recycling pickup.
Moser was visibly distressed during the meeting but maintained his composure. He questioned Nestor about the proposal and said he believed the program could put the independent garbage haulers out of business by January.
In addition to Moser’s garbage hauling business, Mount Carmel is also served by Mostik Bros. Disposal, Waste Management and Jimmy “Buckwheat” Miller.
Before Moser, who has served on council for eight years, began to raise questions about the program, councilman Carl Froutz raised his own concern, saying he wasn’t sure Moser should be asking questions because it may be a “conflict of interest.”
Solicitor Michael Romance assured council that it was acceptable for Moser to ask questions but recommended that he abstain from any vote regarding the proposal.
“In all fairness, this is my business,” said Moser. “I do everything for these people. I don’t understand why the borough wants to get in the trash removal business.”
Under the proposal, billing for the garbage and recycling service would be done through the borough office. Those who do not pay the bill could have a lien placed against their property, said Borough Manager Joseph K. Bass.
With time running out to spend the $400,000 recycling grant, Bass sought out an extension. The one time, three-month extension pushed the deadline back to Nov. 14.
At the work session, Bass was criticized by Moser for waiting so long to find a solution to the recycling problem. He questioned why Bass had not created a plan for a proposed recycling program until the grant was nearly expired.
A recycling program was proposed in February by Nestor, which would have used the grant to purchase start-up equipment. It was determined that the program would have cost the borough $225,000 annually in operational costs. “With an already strapped budget, there would either have to be a tax increase or a loss of services,” said Nestor.
The grant, which was received from DEP in 2006, must be used to purchase equipment and recycling containers, said Nestor.
‘Deficient recycling’
The idea to contract with one hauler came because Nestor said the borough is “severely deficient in recycling tonnage.” This poor participation has landed the borough in violation of Act 101 and Act 140, an amendment to Act 101.
Act 101 requires municipalities with more than 5,000 residents to provide curb side recycling pickup.
The borough has a recycling program in place which is run by volunteers from the Lions Club, Boy Scouts and Rotary Club, but the collection totals only between 10 percent to 12 percent of what the state says the borough should be gathering.
Bass said it is impossible for the volunteer organizations to collect the required amount of recyclables and something had to be done.
If the municipality remains in violation, they would be unable to apply for additional recycling grants or for recycling performance grants, said Tom Rathbun, spokesperson for the state Department of Environmental Protection.
According to Nestor, in the worst case scenario, the state could withhold all state funding from the borough.
Flat fee
The proposed flat fee includes the cost of garbage removal, up to three bags, as well as unlimited recycling and also the cost of yard waste, said Nestor.
With the imposition of a flat fee, Moser said he worries the older population would be cheated.
“What about the 92-year-old lady who calls me every three weeks to get her little white bag of garbage?” he asked.
Nestor, who claimed combining recycling- and garbage-removal services is cheaper, said a discount could be available to seniors. She also said with a mandatory comprehensive service, violators will be more likely to use the service since they are already paying for it. Plus, it would reduce illegal dumping, she said.
Worrisome option
Martina Moser, wife of Councilman Moser, who attended the meeting, pointed out that it is already difficult for independent haulers to collect payment. Moser, who said 80 percent of his business is in Mount Carmel, claimed Tuesday that 20 percent of his clients are delinquent.
Moser has established relationships with his customers, and he believes it would be unfair to force residents to choose a certain hauler. Moser said he and his brother, Ron Moser, go into the homes of their elderly customers and help them carry their bags of garbage and even take out ashes in the winter.
Moser’s business was founded in 1912 by his grandfather. The business was run by his father and now himself and his brother. His son, who is 23, is also involved in the family business.
Paul Vincenzes, a business owner and borough resident, said during the meeting, “This is an assault on the free enterprise system. No municipality should put four or five families out of business.”
He suggested borough officials “put their heads together” and find another way.
Nestor said the smaller waste hauling companies, like Moser Bros., have a chance to win the bid because their costs of operation are lower. Moser said he wasn’t sure his company could compete against larger operations, like Waste Management.
Newly elected board president Tony Matulewicz said he received on Friday the 79-page request to bid a joint recycling and garbage removal program. He believes more time should lapse before a decision of this magnitude is made.
However, Bass said the decision to advertise bids must be made by Thursday to ensure the $400,000 grant money is spent.
Three fellow councilmen — Carl Froutz, Jack Williams and Robert Barrett — made the proposal on the advice of a consultant after learning the borough could lose out on $400,000 in state recycling funding it received two years ago. If so, it could also jeopardize future state appropriations of grant money.
Moser operates an independent waste hauling business. He believes the proposal unfairly targets his business and that of fellow waste haulers, and says there could be a better system.
“How could you take away my business that I built?” Moser, of Moser Bros. Sanitation, asked of his six fellow council members during a three-hour long work session. “There were other options.”
In order to seek compliance with state recycling regulations and to use the $400,000 grant that is nearly expired, the committee and consultant Michelle Nestor, of Nestor Resources Inc., proposed contracting with one single waste hauler to handle refuse and recycling in Mount Carmel.
Under the proposal, a flat fee would be imposed rather than customers paying by the bag, said Nestor, and will include recycling pickup.
Moser was visibly distressed during the meeting but maintained his composure. He questioned Nestor about the proposal and said he believed the program could put the independent garbage haulers out of business by January.
In addition to Moser’s garbage hauling business, Mount Carmel is also served by Mostik Bros. Disposal, Waste Management and Jimmy “Buckwheat” Miller.
Before Moser, who has served on council for eight years, began to raise questions about the program, councilman Carl Froutz raised his own concern, saying he wasn’t sure Moser should be asking questions because it may be a “conflict of interest.”
Solicitor Michael Romance assured council that it was acceptable for Moser to ask questions but recommended that he abstain from any vote regarding the proposal.
“In all fairness, this is my business,” said Moser. “I do everything for these people. I don’t understand why the borough wants to get in the trash removal business.”
Under the proposal, billing for the garbage and recycling service would be done through the borough office. Those who do not pay the bill could have a lien placed against their property, said Borough Manager Joseph K. Bass.
With time running out to spend the $400,000 recycling grant, Bass sought out an extension. The one time, three-month extension pushed the deadline back to Nov. 14.
At the work session, Bass was criticized by Moser for waiting so long to find a solution to the recycling problem. He questioned why Bass had not created a plan for a proposed recycling program until the grant was nearly expired.
A recycling program was proposed in February by Nestor, which would have used the grant to purchase start-up equipment. It was determined that the program would have cost the borough $225,000 annually in operational costs. “With an already strapped budget, there would either have to be a tax increase or a loss of services,” said Nestor.
The grant, which was received from DEP in 2006, must be used to purchase equipment and recycling containers, said Nestor.
‘Deficient recycling’
The idea to contract with one hauler came because Nestor said the borough is “severely deficient in recycling tonnage.” This poor participation has landed the borough in violation of Act 101 and Act 140, an amendment to Act 101.
Act 101 requires municipalities with more than 5,000 residents to provide curb side recycling pickup.
The borough has a recycling program in place which is run by volunteers from the Lions Club, Boy Scouts and Rotary Club, but the collection totals only between 10 percent to 12 percent of what the state says the borough should be gathering.
Bass said it is impossible for the volunteer organizations to collect the required amount of recyclables and something had to be done.
If the municipality remains in violation, they would be unable to apply for additional recycling grants or for recycling performance grants, said Tom Rathbun, spokesperson for the state Department of Environmental Protection.
According to Nestor, in the worst case scenario, the state could withhold all state funding from the borough.
Flat fee
The proposed flat fee includes the cost of garbage removal, up to three bags, as well as unlimited recycling and also the cost of yard waste, said Nestor.
With the imposition of a flat fee, Moser said he worries the older population would be cheated.
“What about the 92-year-old lady who calls me every three weeks to get her little white bag of garbage?” he asked.
Nestor, who claimed combining recycling- and garbage-removal services is cheaper, said a discount could be available to seniors. She also said with a mandatory comprehensive service, violators will be more likely to use the service since they are already paying for it. Plus, it would reduce illegal dumping, she said.
Worrisome option
Martina Moser, wife of Councilman Moser, who attended the meeting, pointed out that it is already difficult for independent haulers to collect payment. Moser, who said 80 percent of his business is in Mount Carmel, claimed Tuesday that 20 percent of his clients are delinquent.
Moser has established relationships with his customers, and he believes it would be unfair to force residents to choose a certain hauler. Moser said he and his brother, Ron Moser, go into the homes of their elderly customers and help them carry their bags of garbage and even take out ashes in the winter.
Moser’s business was founded in 1912 by his grandfather. The business was run by his father and now himself and his brother. His son, who is 23, is also involved in the family business.
Paul Vincenzes, a business owner and borough resident, said during the meeting, “This is an assault on the free enterprise system. No municipality should put four or five families out of business.”
He suggested borough officials “put their heads together” and find another way.
Nestor said the smaller waste hauling companies, like Moser Bros., have a chance to win the bid because their costs of operation are lower. Moser said he wasn’t sure his company could compete against larger operations, like Waste Management.
Newly elected board president Tony Matulewicz said he received on Friday the 79-page request to bid a joint recycling and garbage removal program. He believes more time should lapse before a decision of this magnitude is made.
However, Bass said the decision to advertise bids must be made by Thursday to ensure the $400,000 grant money is spent.
|
| |
| Knoebels smashes single-day attendance record | Changes abound at county career and technology center |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of The News-Item.
Jack wrote on Aug 20, 2008 10:57 AM:
" I agree with councilman Froutz, this is clearly a conflict of interest, what will the residents of Mt Carmel do if $400,000 of grant money dries up? I'm sure the delinquent accounts don't add up to that amount "
bob- shamoke wrote on Aug 20, 2008 1:12 PM:
" It's a terrible shame when the backbone of the local economy- the local business is forced out.
A national company does not channel money back into the local economy. the profits line the pockets of the bosses.
Local haulers should be permitted to pick up recycling the same way they pick up general trash, because each customer prefers to use them. "
A national company does not channel money back into the local economy. the profits line the pockets of the bosses.
Local haulers should be permitted to pick up recycling the same way they pick up general trash, because each customer prefers to use them. "
dolly wrote on Aug 20, 2008 3:36 PM:
" DO NOT ALLOW THE STATE TO COME IN AND SAY WHO COLLECTS OUR TRASH FOR A FLAT-FEE!!! I HAVE SHOPPED AROUND, FOR MY FAMILY WASTE MANAGEMENT PROVIDES THE BEST SERVICE FOR OUR NEEDS AND BY FAR THE BEST PRICE!!! SENOIRS WOULD GET A DISCOUNT, PER THE USUAL- MIDDLE AND LOW INCOME FAMILIES WILL NOT!!! GETTING BANGED AGAIN FOR BEING HARD-WORKING AND UNDER 65!!!!! WE ARE CARRYING THIS TOWN ALREADY, GETTING NO BREAKS FROM THE FED OR STATE GOV'T, AND PAYING TWO LOCAL TAXES BECAUSE OF BIG- BUSINESS B.S.- ITS ENOUGH ALREADY!!!! "
