Transfer station strains prompt petition warrant, solid waste committee seeks study funds

The town's transfer station and solid waste operations drew extended discussion as the Solid Waste Committee described space, storage and operational limits at the existing site and asked the Select Board to fund preliminary study work toward a possible new transfer station.

Rich and Solid Waste Committee members said the facility sits on an uncapped landfill footprint that limits breaking ground for storage and staging. The committee described insufficient storage capacity for recyclables and construction and demolition loads, increasing tipping fees, and state composting requirements that may soon force changes for businesses that generate one ton of food waste per week. "If we can remove that food waste out of our waste stream, we can save 25% on our tipping fee straight off the top," a committee member said.

A petition warrant article to replace the packer truck for $60,000 was filed by a resident, and staff confirmed it met the voter-signature thresholds to appear on the warrant. Committee and board members noted the $60,000 estimate likely understates full cost: electrical upgrades (three-phase power), concrete pads, two roll-off containers and hauling contracts would likely push total project cost materially higher; one estimate for a used unit in good condition was cited near $120,000 and installing three-phase power was estimated at over $100,000 in prior work. Because of these unknowns the Solid Waste Committee did not endorse the petition article.

Separately, the Solid Waste Committee proposed creating a new capital/study line by transferring the $6,900 remaining in a 1985 capital reserve into a new account and adding roughly $3,035 from the operating budget to make an initial $10,000 study fund. Committee members said the study would pay for site assessment, public outreach, engineering options (drive-on scale, composting, expanded storage) and scoping so the town could return to a future meeting with firm cost estimates and an informed warrant article. Select Board members urged a staged approach: small feasibility funds first, then a larger bonded project if warranted in a later year.

Board members and committee members also discussed alternatives including contracted curbside pickup and drive-on scales used by nearby Guilford (committee cited a $40,000 scale that returned $80,000 revenue its first year). No binding decision to change the transfer station operation was made; the Select Board asked staff to confirm whether the $6,900 reserve could be closed and reallocated and directed the Solid Waste Committee to specify an estimate for a discrete study scope and cost.

The petition warrant article will appear on the warrant and will be debated at town meeting; the board advised proponents that voters will be asked to weigh the petition's $60,000 figure against full project estimates if they choose to approve a larger scope later.