Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Food Waste And Pilots topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Members weigh food‑waste pilots, curbside convenience and hauler constraints
Summary
Municipal representatives discussed barriers to food‑waste diversion — especially trucking costs and convenience — and described local drop‑off and subscription experiences; Somers and another town reported steady drop‑off tonnage and members proposed neighborhood pilot models.
At the meeting members spent substantial time on practical barriers to food‑waste diversion and possible pilot designs. Donald Brunelle (Enfield) said his town had asked him to find ways to "revolutionize trash pick up and cut costs without changing barrel size or reducing any of the services we have now," and expressed skepticism that savings are possible without changes to service or contract terms.
Christina (Somers) described Somers’ mixed approach — a combination of curbside service and a recycling/transfer station drop‑off — and noted that some towns pay for pickup on a single hauler’s truck. She said Somers does not have universal curbside service and that local dynamics differ across towns.
Rebecca summarized results from neighborhood and transfer‑station drop‑offs: "We have about 300 or so people signed up to use the app and we have about 100 people a week who use it, but we get 1,000 lb of food waste basically every week" from collection units across town. She and others said that modest, committed participation in drop‑off programs can yield measurable tonnage but that scaling requires convenience (curbside) or sufficient density.
Members emphasized two recurring constraints: the fixed cost of truck routes and the convenience gap for residents. Several participants said collection trucks and route economics dominate costs; one member noted that reducing household pail sizes often changes household behavior but does not eliminate the truck cost, which is the larger line item.
Scott outlined an early plan for plastic‑film recycling: the grant includes money for a baler, but operations need indoor storage and about "15 to 20 bales" before vendors will pick up regularly; the authority expects an RFP this summer if towns can secure storage and volume.
Participants also discussed household hazardous‑waste (HHW) collection turnout and regional events: recent satellite and regional HHW days attracted between roughly 350 and 740 residents depending on the event, and members said regional coordination has proved efficient for volume and turnout.
The discussion closed without formal policy votes; members asked staff and H2M to continue hauler outreach, explore neighborhood pilot sites (multi‑unit housing or schools were suggested), and pursue procurement planning for equipment like film balers. The chair asked members to recruit additional towns to grow CCSWA membership ahead of the next full meeting, tentatively scheduled for September.
