How I wish Brattleboro would follow Westminsters lead. This mornings Reformer let us know that residents of Westminster will be receiving a mailing with information regarding their “new” trash/recycling program. Included with the mailing will be 52 STICKERS FOR 52 WEEKS OF TRASH …………….. and they’re FREE, FREE, FREE! If residents use more than one bag per week they’ll have to purchase additional bags for $3.00 each. This is a perfect example of those in charge governing and at the same time considering and showing compassion and understanding towards their residents.
Comments | 9
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Never going to happen
“governing and at the same time considering and showing compassion and understanding towards their residents” – a concept that will never be thought of or implemented by our SelectBoard members. Westminster obviously knows that there are some things that matter more than the almighty dollar.
why not...
1. The Committee didn’t recommend it.
2. The Selectboard didn’t make them add it in.
3. Town Meeting Representatives didn’t make them add it in.
I do recall stickers being
I do recall stickers being discussed at some meeting and recall them being shot down for some reason………..and I think they weren’t even to be free! Someone simply did not want stickers.
Wish my memory were better and I could remember who/what/when etc.
decisions were made
I went on the Brattleboro.org website and found the minutes for the PAYT working group/committee. Here is the decision from the August 27, 2014 minutes:
“Determine Proxy – A discussion occurred about the value of bags as compared with stickers or bands. Moss (Kahler) described other communities as having been challenged by stickers. Bags of a specific color will make it easy for haulers to identify acceptable versus unacceptable disposal. There may be greater participation arising from peer pressure as a result of being able to identify proper disposal from afar. Easy identification of proper disposal may also reduce illegal diversion.
Jane Southworth moved to use bags in two sizes as the proxy. Peter Gaskill second. The motion passed unanimously.”
A feature of this meeting and almost all others is: “Public participation – none”
Andy
Because " peer pressure" is
Because ” peer pressure” is such a powerful deterrent. Perhaps we can have squads of “trash police” patrolling those neighborhoods that have the most trash.
Hmmmmm. I've always been of
Hmmmmm. I’ve always been of the opinion that any town committee could only make recommendations and the decision making was up to the selectboard or RTM.
I do agree that some public participation would be nice however, many residents, due to age, illness, disability, work, family etc, are not able to attend meetings. There are many other ways to get the publics opinion if its really wanted!
My understanding is that the
My understanding is that the PAYT committee was comprised of only people who had a vested interest in the way that PAYT would eventually be implemented. I don’t believe any “regular” town residents ( those who did not work for or would somehow profit from this project) were sought out to be a part of this committee. And, other than the regular notices posted in the paper or on this site I never saw any attempt to involve or welcome the public to these meetings. People did speak out at Selectboard meetings and send emails to the SB regarding other ways that PAYT could be implemented that would have less of a negative effect on elderly and low income residents but, as we now see, that public input was rejected. I guess the SelectBoard is not easily swayed by peer pressure
Well, add that to my
Well, add that to my reason(s) why there is a lack of public participation.
unfortunately
Being ignored by the SB is not unique.