Town Services and Outreach Committee Sep 3, 2026

I have to um >> I'm sorry. >> Um if people come into this room, I may have to go off video. >> Okay. You're blurred as it is. So your background is blurred. So >> yeah. >> All right. It's uh Thursday morning, September 3rd, 2026. And this is a regular meeting of the town services and outreach committee. And chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extended through June 30, 2027 gives public bodies like this the ability to hold meetings remotely. This meeting is accessible in real time via Zoom and by phone and it's being recorded. Just going to check first of all to make sure that uh my colleagues can all be heard. So Pam Rooney, >> yes. >> And Andy Churchill, >> yes. >> And Jennifer Tob, >> yes. And of course, and we have in attendance, Guilford Moing. Um, and we are at the moment missing one colleague, Hollow Lord. Um, if she comes in, we will check and make sure she can be heard. Um, >> we have a actually, yeah, Mimi is here. Great. Thank you, Mimi. I'm glad to see you there. Mimi, if you just unmute for a second so because we're going to be we're going to have a live conversation back and forth. So Mimi, >> morning everybody. >> Thank you. Good morning Mimi. >> I'm here. >> So um today's agenda is essentially focused on the request for proposal related to waste hauler and we're going to spend most of the meeting on that. In the last half hour we have a number of town manager appointments and the town manager will be joining us around 11 o'clock. um at least that's the plan and we'll take those up. But the bulk of the meeting is focused on this one agenda item. We'll talk about that in more detail in a moment. Um I'm going to begin with public comment. we have [clears throat] at the moment for people in the public and so public comment is welcome on matters within the jurisdiction of TSO and residents are welcome to express their views for up to three minutes when you're recognized please state your name and where you live and at the moment I see one hand up uh Darcy Dumont Darcy if you'd unmute and if you would speak >> hi good Morning. My name is Darcy Dumont and I live in district 3. I'm speaking on behalf of zero waste ammers today. My comments are in response to some of the discussion in the last TSO meeting about the language of the waist hauler RFP. first um a quote wide openen unquote RFP as suggested by the manager and by councelor Churchill allowing the town to choose lesser practices won't actually accomplish what the proposal sets out to do. Thus, we need to define what the town wants in the way of acceptable waste reduction options and provide an advantage in the bids for the offer of best practices. If we aren't creating sign significant waste reduction, there's no reason to be doing this at all. Um, if we don't get biders, um, that'll tell us that we need to do something different. Um, secondly, the RFP needs to acknowledge that it's about the behavior changes needed to reduce our waste. We know it will require outreach and education and that there will be some early resistance, which always happens when a new program is implemented. Research suggests that it takes six to 18 months for residents to learn and accept the program. It was a little alarming to hear suggestions suggestions that we should try to avoid resistance to the changes by giving ground on best practices. Thirdly, um we endorse Mimi Kaplan's suggestion of a preference for weekly 35gallon carts with overflow bags if those 35gallon carts are also offered bi-weekly as done in ZWA's model community, Lewisville, Colorado, um and other communities. Uh this is actually a change from our previous recommendation that and it's not a complicated choice. Bi-weekly carts could be a different color, making it easier for the haulers. There there are people living in one or two person households in single family homes in Ammerst who make very little waste. As an example, I live alone and currently get bi-weekly trash pickup from USA even though I put it out no less than every four weeks. We recommend giving an advantage to vendors who can do the overflow bag method and who can pick up both weekly and bi-weekly. Um, we want the town to give preference to haulers who provide dual stream recycling. USA can adapt to dual stream as other facilities do. You may have heard about the New Jersey communities that have returned to dual stream from single stream recycling. In addition, California recently actually passed a law providing for a preference of uh contracting with haulers who provide dual stream recycling based on its being best practice. TSO doesn't need to decide any of this before the RFP is out other than that they will provide a preference for haulers who use best practices in general. Not including this alternative gives the appearance of favoring biders who currently do only single stream and or use their own single stream processing. Um, also ZWA doesn't think the alternative of anorobic digestion should be offered at all due to the much smaller range of compostable materials that could be collected using that system. And lastly, um please give space to the council sponsors who'll be asking for input and to the board of health um that maintains the regulations around the details of this proposal and that has strongly supported this proposal for years now. Thanks so much for all your work on this. >> Thank you, Darcy. I see no other hands for public comment. So we are going to move then to the next item on the agenda which is the uh decision points for RFP. And before we do that, I want to just do a quick recap from last time, partly because I would like some input from I guess we have one member at the moment. I don't see Hala here but um we came to somewhat of a consensus um last time in terms of uh our initial discussion and hopefully you've had a chance to look at the the recording and we agreed at least the three of us that a pay as you throw a PA YT model for trash collection along with curbside organics collection that would be required of all residents at some stage were the two things that we came to an agreement on at least initially. Um any further thoughts on that broad discussion? Because today we're going to look at specific decision points starting at the very top of the of the list. Okay. Okay, I'm not seeing any further comments there, so I'm just going to move on. [clears throat] Before we begin, I also want to point out we've gotten a number of uh communications, a couple from Susan Wait, one from the manager, and I've shared them with committee members um and urge you if you get a chance. One is a recent article about Greenfield's experience related to recycling. Um, one was a recent piece that Susan shared with us and the link is been sent to you on how to make organics cost effective that it's a is a way to actually lower costs overall if it's done right organics collection. And then finally, we Susan notified us or let us know that there's a meeting of the mass D organic subcommittee coming up and their focus in that particular meeting is exactly on what we're talking about residential collection or programs um particularly with with organics. So that's on September 16th and again the link has been shared with you and hopefully some all of us can can sit in on that. Um so my strategy here we have about roughly 10 items give or take that we need to focus on and unlike last time my thought was we would just proceed at the very top and work our way through it. Um some I think will take much more discussion than others and we have about 90 minutes. Um and I'll be keeping an eye on the clock. Some of the items may not be things that we really can have much input on that we may need staff input or manager input and the very first item might fall into that category. So uh Mimi you might want to weigh in here as well in terms of your thoughts but the first item uh for a decision point is called contract length and the decision point is between three years and five years and there are arguments on both sides. um thoughts on that first decision point. Susan, please. >> Hi. Um I would just like to um suggest that Mimi explain um she she worked hard this last uh the last few weeks pulling together some information to help um advise and give background around each of these decision points. And so um I think I I would love for her to be able to explain that and perhaps share what she um has to share on each of the decision points. >> Okay. Thanks, Susan. Yeah, I put together a document and I did send it to Paul, but I'm not sure it didn't make its way to you. Um, >> it did not. >> No. So, sorry that that was the case. Um, we were hoping to give you I was hoping to give you some background information, some comments and considerations to help with your decision- making. Um, and this was based on input from Susan, from some of the other uh solid waste coordinators that I've talked to in the area, research, etc. Um so in terms of contract length um I guess one thought is that because of the startup costs um and also uh the fact of of possibly implementing compost collection over a period of time that it's possible at a 5-year contract would be preferable. Um, you know, I know that's it's understandable that uh a shorter contract can also be preferable in case residents in the town are unhappy with the hauler and you would want to change haulers. Um, and that might make sense after this initial contract. Um, I mean it could make sense for this contract, but just consider the fact that um due to startup costs with things like procuring carts um and trucks as well as implementing the compost collection that a longer contract could make sense for this initial one. I see Guilford Moing has his hand up. Guilford, would you speak? Hi, I just want to point out that if you decide five or five years, there may be some other things we need to do. Um, we are limited to three-year contracts right now. I believe if we go beyond a three-year contract, we have to do something else. That's a finance director question, but if you want five years, you should say yes, you want five years, and we just have to confirm with the the finance director. All contracts in the state of Massachusetts, they have a clause in it that says that each contract is subject to appropriation. So, in in reality, you're just setting a contract overall limit, but every year you have to renew that contract and there has to be money appropriated for it. These are just these are just little details in the system. But [clears throat] if you you recommend five, we just need to figure out if we can do five or if we have to stay with three and then go on. >> And Gilford, you're saying that's something that the finance director could answer probably um quite quickly. >> Oh, I'm sure they tell me things all the time, so I'm sure they should be able to answer it. >> Okay. thought to my colleagues on this. Andy, go ahead. >> Um, I'm just wondering if we might end up with separate contracts for um, you know, waste and uh, recycling and uh, on one on the one hand and uh, composting on the other, in which case a three-year contract wouldn't be as much of a problem. Mimi have any thoughts on that? Um the likelihood of of of having two separate contracts? Um yeah, I mean that is going to be a potential situation um that you would that you would find yourselves in um if you ended up contracting say with a local compost collection company such as Banana Compost and and that might take a little bit longer. Um uh [sighs] yeah, I mean you'd still have the the issue of um startup costs being able to be distributed over a longer period of time if you do a 5-year contract um because a lot of those will still be um a piece of trash and recycling collection. Mhm. >> Andy, >> is uh fiveyear going to likely to be more attractive to the to the contractors? >> That I don't know. I mean, when I looked at RFPs, I saw a range. Um [sighs] my I don't know. Did did Paul also forward you the municipal data sheet that shows all the Okay, >> I think I think that um contract length is included on that. So, it might be interesting to see what the majority of of communities do. [snorts] And I don't know if Susan has any [clears throat] >> perspective on that that I don't have. I would have to I would have to do some some a little digging. My guess is that a longer contract initially would be more attractive because they can offer a more attractive pricing because of the distribution over over time. Um it is you know startup costs are not are not um small when you have to purchase carts for thousands of people. So um having some extra time to spread that cost is helpful. And I think but I I don't know. I I mean you'd have to ask a hauler. So what I'm hearing and I'm happy to have others weigh in here is that um five years has a number of advantages especially given that this is a a whole new project that we're imagining. Um, and one could then after that initial 5-year period that could be changed. Um, and each year the contract needs to be renewed. But given what I would think would be the attractiveness of a longer contract to vendors, I would think and the fact that we're going to be there's going to be a sizable startup cost involved. Um, five years I would think would be preferable. I also feel like this is something that um staff needs to weigh in on. Um finance director may have thoughts. Um the DPW director may have thoughts, the manager may have thoughts. I don't know that it's a decision that I personally um have no strong feeling one way or the other. Um I'm not sure that our recommendation is it a recommendation, a requirement. Um anyway, Jennifer Um [clears throat] yeah, I I would agree with the five years as well also since um as ZWA has seen that it it's usual for it to take 6 to 18 months for the community to really um you know understand it, come on board, be comfortable with it. So there's going to be a long ramping up process at least the for the first contract, >> right? learning curve, um startup costs, um first time pro first time doing this, um potential attractiveness to a vendor who can look at five years as opposed to three years as an initial commitment. Um those are all strong reasons. I'm struggling to come up with good reasons. The only one I've heard so far is that well, what if you're not happy? You're you're now locked into a five-year contract with a a vendor you're not happy with. Um Susan, >> if you're not happy, um a good RFP and contract will have some um liquidated damages type um things that that you can pursue. So you know, you know, you figure out what is going to make you unhappy. You find out what you and you and you make a liquidated damage to address it. And I mean the we you have to enter a contract with good faith that you're going to work together and work things through. So it's hard for me to imagine that a case where you would be just so wildly unhappy after 3 years that you would want out. It's it's yeah it doesn't seem um >> likely. Guilford our our standard contracts. When we do a contract, we have language for default and so forth. So, we would put those it would be the standard contract language in there once we do the once we choose the proposers. >> Okay. Well, I'm prepared to move on. I think um Mimi, what uh I'm hearing and I'm you're hearing it, I'm sure, as well is that there seems to be a preference for five years over three. And I don't know to what degree that really helps you in the thousand things you have to do to create an RFP, but um that gives you I think at the moment unless I hear otherwise a sense of the committee on that first uh decision point. The second decision point um involves evaluation criteria >> um and to what degree um issues around environmental sustainability should be included in the contract language and if so what specific sustainability factors should be in the language and here we get I think um some help from zero waste ammerst um they would certainly like to see waste reduction data and emissions reduction data as a required reporting by the vendor. So, let's maybe start with that. Um, those two requirements, is that something ownorous, Mimi? Is that something that that a vendor would would throw up their hands and say, you know, why are you making us do this? Is this pretty standard? Um, let's start with, I guess, the first item, which is reduction, waste reduction data. Um I feel like that's a different section than evaluation criteria. >> Okay. >> Um >> go ahead. >> I mean if you're looking at which criteria you're going to say you're going to evaluate the haulers on. You're looking at what are their um their p what's their past performance. um you know, you're deciding whether to include sustainability, like would you give preference for um any haulers that use electric vehicles for example? Um, so I mean besides cost um and besides having uh you know a certain number of references for communities in Massachusetts um that they can say that they've done this type of service for um you know what what is the criteria that you're quite to rank um the haulers on and being specific about that. So like in the in the draft, you know, it's the level of service providing a high level of service. They'll demonstrate extensive prior experience. They'll provide at least three references. They'll have a documentation of safety standards and training, financial statements. Um they'll be able to demonstrate um that they have the equipment and can operate on the schedule desired um that they can maximize operational administrative efficiency. And then there's also this question of environmental sustainability. So in the one the draft one it says the preferred proposal will include examples of environmental sustainability metrics and include options for innovative advances such as electric collection trucks. So I think other than the environmental sustainability I think the rest of these are pretty um >> you know standard like you're going to include those. So I feel [clears throat] like the main question was would you want to include environmental sustainability in your criteria, your valuation criteria because if you do um you know that that could potentially increase cost if you if you decide that you know you're going to favor say um you know a hauler that can demonstrate that they that they meet certain environmental sustainability criteria. The question is if you would, you know, is it it's it's important to to think about what your priorities are, you know, and also to think about is that that important in this initial contract when you're getting this off the ground. Um, and is it if it is something important, you know, does it need to be now? Could it be in the next contract? Um, I actually have no idea how many [laughter] EVs there are out there for um, collection trucks. I don't even know if that's even an option right now. Um, >> so I mean what you know one sustainability metric you know is you know if they're very efficient in their roots right like how much how much exhaust is there going to be um [gasps] >> so I mean I guess it would be helpful to give you more information of what kind of examples there are of environmental sustainability ability metrics that you might include. But I guess I guess one qu the question is, is that even something you'd want to want to include or do you just leave it out this this initial round? >> Jennifer, I think you were first, but I don't. I was, you know, Jennifer, please. >> Okay. So, I just have a question. So when we say um you know environmental sustainability metrics that's is that also getting to how much waste we think we diverted from a landfill. I mean is that measurable? I I'm just thinking in terms of you know being able to show metrics to the community that we've saved them money and that there's and maybe you can't do that in a three to five year period. So that's what I was thinking in terms of metrics for environmental sustainability if there's any way to measure that. I mean, I don't know if it might be something such as asking them what what level of like recycling contamination um you know, has there been in in previous as as part of their references um or um you know, level of experience um being able to to demonstrate you know that they've that they've been able to reduce recycling contamination. Is this something that communities usually don't do at least their first because I would defer to you and you know Susan for what what what's doable. >> Um I will say that I hadn't seen that in in most of the local um RFPs. You know, keep in mind this was coming from Brooklyn and Newton. >> Thank you >> Susan. I'm going to let Susan respond because the question was directed to her and then I'll go to Andy. Susan, >> I just wanted to say that th we are this section is the criteria that you're going to state by which you are going to be judging and selecting the haulers. So the question is it's so so the um Jennifer's data question you know that's something that's that can be worked out either by the town or the you know whatever you can definitely get metrics this is not about are you going to provide metrics or not this is about we are saying that the town of Ammerst is going to be selecting our hauler based on these these key criteria for this round. Do you want to include something that is um that is strong a strong uh voice about sustainability or do you want to just say uh sustainable whatever is strong is preferred you know I mean that's something that you can also do but it's a um what Mimi is saying is that she hasn't seen a lot of really strong statements about the requirement of sustainable practices in the selection criteria. Most municipalities are concerned about keeping costs down, so they want to weigh it. So to to put it out there as something that you are going to be using to select the vendor is a really it's a big deal and and it's a decision, you know, that you all need to be behind or um yeah, >> I apologize. I really was conflating it, you're right, with what we were going to be looking for during the contract. So yeah, it probably doesn't need to be part of the RFP evaluation. So Andy and then uh Guilford. Andy. >> Yeah, I was going to say that that that sounded like an evaluation criterion about how how's how's the contract going? What are the reductions that that we're getting during the contract? Um the other thing is um um that I I wonder if I mean certain I would be up for saying you know all things being equal will will give a preference to to those that ha that have um more you know lower emissions or um you know more efficient routes or whatever. Um we have an efficiency thing in there I think already. So um but um you know I I have heard commercials from USA Waste saying we power our trucks with you know natural gas as opposed to gasoline or diesel. So I would imagine that they would say that and other places might say that similar things or or if they have electric great they would say it. But I I would agree that I think that's more of a all things being equal at this point. I wouldn't tr let that trump you know some of the other criteria >> Guilford um I just kind of wanted to say it's you have to be able to quantify what's acceptable what's most advantageous what's advantageous and what's not advantageous when you're doing the proposal so when you try to think of these criteria you have to have some way to in the RFP there has to be some statement of how these are you know so the most advantageous is the company has been in in in business for over 20 years um advantageous is they've been in business for five years not advantageous is they just started um so th those are how you look at these criteria and how they get get evaluated as we go through so that's just um so every there's A through H of these criteria every one of these we h there has to be some way to do that. So if you giving sustainability data is not that you have to have a criteria that says what's advantageous in sustainability data. So that that's how to think about the criteria a little bit more. I just want to add that. So what I'm hearing here, I'm just going to jump in. Um that I think given Ammeris history, um the issue of sustainability does matter. I think some kind of language that would recognize that would be appropriate. However, stronger wording or very specific items might create all kinds of challenges on on many levels. So perhaps simply language to the effect that there would be preference for proven sustainability or proven sustainable practices leaving it to the vendor to [clears throat] then respond and to tell us the ways in which they feel that they're meeting sustainability and and and the practices that they have adopted whether it be you know you know using natural gas whatever um or the more efficient roots. Um so rather than listing a series of specific items or demanding or saying we'll give preference to um vendors that have electric vehicles when as Mimi's pointed out we don't even know if they exist and if they do we don't know if anyone's even using them in this region. Perhaps what we should do on the one hand is acknowledge the importance of s sustainability to the town and to its goals and to its values but leave the language such that it would invite the vendor then to respond specifically and those that had more uh sustainability practices would be you know most advantageous. Those that had a few would be you know advantageous and those who had nothing would be less advantageous. Something like that. Does that make sense? Um, to the rest of you, Andy, >> are we going to assign point values to each of these and then say, you know, 10 points for this, 20 points for that, we don't do that. Okay. >> Well, that's a question. I I'm shaking my head thinking I Yeah, but that's a question. Yes. Is that something Guilford that we do? Maybe is that something that that is done or is it more like most advant advantageous, advantageous, and not advantageous? It's Guilford's nodding saying it's the latter. >> Yes, you're not supposed to get you're not supposed to give points to it. You know, you figure out how many advantageouses someone has, most advantageous. You see who has the most. Um it does it is kind of a a hidden point thing where you know maybe there's three points for advant most advantageous to and you kind of but you're not supposed to give points. It's not supposed to have a point system in the evaluation. >> Okay. But you do need to be able to back up your decision because any hauler not chosen could be very unhappy. And >> so we would say Mimi for instance that if someone was unhappy um and sustainability was the issue, we would point to say well in your response you gave us nothing or you only mentioned one item or two items whereas the preferred vendor um mentioned three or four items um something like that. But um we're not going to be giving points and we're not going to list specific um practices um but rather simply say that preference would be given um to for you would word the language the way it would should be but basically preference given for those who demonstrate um you know sustainable practices, >> right? or the other situation where one one response might have better sustainability practices but a higher cost and you don't go with them. >> Right. The other issue on this sheet is is cost a factor and I'm not quite sure how to deal with that because obviously it is a factor but um is it uh is there is there a consideration of costs? Um, I think in the end that's always going to be something that we'll be considering. I don't think it's specific to sustainability. Sustainability might raise the cost to a certain degree. Um, but I don't know that there's anything we could put into an RFP that would would determine that one way or the other. Um, Guilford. So, so for cost in an RFP process, you must choose the best qualified person based on what they submit in their proposal. The cost any if you ask for the cost to do things that has to be in a separate envelope and you do not look at that during the evaluation process. You can only look at that once you've decided this is my number one, two, and three people. And then you can go to your number one person's envelope and look at cost and go number two please. And then you go number three please. And then you go I don't know if I really want to do this. Um that's kind of how the it's supposed to work. Sorry. >> No. No. That's very helpful Gilford because at least this is one member of this committee has never done this before. So I don't know about others but uh this is new to me. So good. Um I'm prepared to move on to the next item. what I'm hearing maybe and please if you're not hearing what you need to hear let us know that um yes sustainability should be listed but it should be this sort of very broad language where we would expect the vendor to in their response to tell us what they're doing to meet um basic environmental and sustainability goals. And if they don't say anything, that's concerning. And if they do say something, we'd be very, very interested in it would be something we'd give preference to all things considered. >> All right, that sounds good. Thanks. >> Good. Next item is pre-proposal information meeting. Informational meeting. Information meeting. Uh, mandatory or optional? This sounds like staff type thing, but anybody thoughts on this? Guilford, Mimi, Susan, anybody? >> This is a big thing. I think you need to have a mandatory meeting. >> Okay, I see three heads nodding already. That's good. Um, four, why why do you have to have a mandatory meeting? I'm I'm going to be stupid here because in fact, I don't know anything. So, why why can't you have an optional meeting? >> Um, it seems like we have a we have a lot of concerns and a lot of things we want to express. Some things will be in the proposal but I think the vendors need to understand what our crit what our u what what we truly wish to do. So I think having the vendors come in ask questions we really can't answer well actually at a mandatory meeting we can answer the questions but we also have to provide a written responses as well. Um, but it would be better if everyone's there, everyone can hear the same thing, see the reactions of when they ask the questions and so forth. It's kind of it' be help more helpful I would think for us. >> Andy, I agree, but I'm wondering will will that increase or or decrease the number of applicants? >> I think we're actually a plum cherry. Everybody wants to keep the company that's doing most of the trash hauling here wants to keep us. Other people want to come in and get us. Um I think there'll be enough response that there'll be interest. >> So if there's a mandatory meeting and somebody doesn't show up, that basically means they're out of the running or it just Yeah. >> Okay. Jennifer. >> Yeah. So I worked, you know, in nonprofits submitting RFPs for a number of years. It's not usually want to go, you know, you welcome the opportunity to be at a meeting. It's not a hardship, you know, if you want the business. Um, so I would also ask who would be at the meeting would TSO members or sponsors of the waist holler bylaw, would it just be staff? Is that a decision we can weigh in on? >> You usually it's just staff. Um, that's something I would ask the town manager how he feels about having a a meeting with other people there. >> Okay. >> But then again, again, if it's a TSO meeting, you're now a public meeting. Um, >> right. >> Yeah, I think at this stage, um, well, yeah, I guess I won't I don't know. Okay, so mand um, mandatory attendance. >> All right, got it. Unless councelor Churchill has an objection. Councelor Churchill. >> No, I mean that sounds like the procurement folks would be handling that part, right? >> I think the answer is yes. >> Okay. >> Yes, >> that's all right. [clears throat] Thank you. Item four in my list, trash is broadly speaking trash. Um, start with trash carts and who purchases them? And here we might have some issues. Um, should the town own the carts? Should the vendor own the carts? Thoughts? >> I can read to you from the document I put together. >> Please, would you do that? Thank you. >> Pros and cons. Okay. Uh it is easier in terms of effort and financially to have the vendor procure the carts and they likely will get better pricing from cart suppliers that they purchase from regularly. But there are risks and costs involved. If you plan to have the haller procure the carts, you should still price things out to determine the cost differential if the town purchases the carts. Um so it is considered a best practice for the municipality to own the carts at least by the end of the contract. Um car life expectancy is about 10 years in cart distribution and collection is a difficult process. Um, and if a hauler owns the carts at the end of the contract and the municipality has chosen a different vendor, then the cart collection process would be very difficult with the timing of the old cart collection and new cart distribution by a new hauler. So, if the town owns the carts, it's just easier down the line, especially if the hauler you change haulers. Um it it is also a possibility that Ammerst could get grant funding that pays for a part a piece of the grant of the um sorry of the um the cart purchasing. It seems to be and Susan can comment on this. Um I guess you could call it a best practice for the town to purchase the carts, but I I'm not sure if that's considered a best practice, but I would say that that seems to be the more common practice. Susan, I'll start with you and then I'm going to go to um Pam. >> Sure. I just want to say that Mass D considers it a best practice as do some consultants that they have worked with um in part because of the transfer of ownership. It's it can just be a real nightmare there. There's actually a a town in Ohio that is suing their vendor because the vendor is not charging them for cart collection at the end of their contract. They're actually charging client residents individually on their bill for part cart collection and that was not um it's just this big huge thing and it's been in the news and everything. So, at the very least, if you choose to have the vendor own the carts, then there should be some kind of a clause that says at the end of the contract, there's not going to be a fee for collection of those carts. But, um, so it's it's really your choice. Um, it's because of the, uh, life expectancy of a cart, you know, it makes sense to keep it as long as you can. if you change vendors and it says a vendor's name all over it, um that it just complicates things. And I can tell you, I just was talking to the folks in Pittsfield and distributing carts can be um it's it's ownorous and and so if you're going to have to change swap out the carts, it's just it's a lot of work and you don't you want to avoid it if you can. Pam. >> Um I don't know if the town has I I suspect the town has the ability to go through the um I don't know the term but um preferential pricing for u materials and um I think it was indefinite quantities contract. Um Mihek Mihek is the is the the corporation the group that that handles that. So, municipalities get discounts or or actually they get pre-approved contractors to choose from. I don't know if that would give us a better advantage than a um a private company would get in purchasing carts. Um if the town were to um purchase carts, it sounds like the intent was to ramp up over time. First, it's single family homes, then it's multif family homes, etc. the cost burden wouldn't be all at once. Although I I can see stockpiles of of bins out at Ruxton, you know, with here's our supply for as we ramp up. Um there needs to be some storage capability for >> I think there's this room in Guilford's office. I think we could probably >> Oh, yeah, that's right. It'll be vacant right over there by their fridge. >> Exactly. we could store them there, right? So, there's going to be a cost factor for the town, but that's a given. What I'm hearing here is that best practices, most common practice um is for town ownership for a host of reasons, but that is an expense for the town and obviously a task that would fall to staff, which would fall to DPW. So, um we need to weigh that. Andy, >> I'm curious about the storage piece and and um you know our capacity to to deal with thousands of bins. I guess that's a question for Guilford. >> Yes, it is. Guilford. Um well hopefully we store them at everybody's house so there's no storage issue. Everybody's they're all spread all over town and there's only a small amount that's actually in the storage yard at any one time. So it would only be a short-term storage for storage issue. Um but as as you guys talk about this um let the proposer let the people who are proposing in the proposal tell you what they prefer. I mean, you might have a proposer who has a really good deal on carts and he likes to use that cart supplier and he may say, "I'll provide the carts." And if it says in the RFP they belong to the town after the contract's over, that's fine. But that makes Let them tell you what they can do or what they can think how they can think about this. Don't don't don't give them a artificial setup that they really you may not need to have. So, if it has the name of the vendor on it, um, that's not a big deal. >> We just put in the RFP, the carts have to be new. You must provide new carts. >> If we want a color coding system, they must be colorcoded as we say. >> If they must be labeled with the town of Ammerst name on them, and at the end of the five five year or three-year contract, the carts belong to the town. So, those are things we tell them in the proposal up front that this is how we're looking at it. And then we can you know then they can propose if they that's how they want to do it or they want us to provide the cards or so forth. So it just needs to be just needs to be worded right in in the proposal. I got Susan shaking yes which is >> Susan that looks like yes. Um, Mimi is that I'm going to come to Annie in a second, but Mimi, what you're hearing uh is similar to language that's already in the draft or you you what you're hearing is language you could easily put into the draft that would capture um what Guilford is identifying here. Um that uh basically the cards would be new. Uh I don't know about color coding, but if that's needed, that could be in there. The town's logo would be on it and at the end of this um they belong to the town. Yeah, [clears throat] that would not be hard to put that language in the RFP. I think it's a little different from what's in the draft, but it can be revised. >> Is there language in the draft that you want to bring up here that that we should discuss. Um, I don't have it in front of me because I've got five other things in front of me. Um, maybe someone else has a draft in front of them. That would be nice. I know Mimi does. Um, while Mimi's looking, I'm gonna ask Andy. Go ahead, Andy. Can we just specify that we don't have the name of the contractor on the on the bins in case the contract changes? Is that that we just the the identification would be town of Ammerst? >> Yes, that right. Yes. >> Okay. Well, um [clears throat] >> uh in the current draft, it says procurement and inventory tracking of parts and new carts will be the responsibility of the contractor. Cart ownership will remain with the municipality. >> Okay. >> So, we could change the language to not say that procurement will be the responsibility of the contractor. We can leave that open. >> Okay. I see general agreement. I don't unless there's other concerns, we're going to move on to size. >> Okay, >> Mimi, do you want to share? >> Yeah. Um, all right. I I'll just read to you what's in the the document we wrote up if that's okay. Um, all right. A 35gallon cart is equivalent in size to a large garbage bag in a standard old-fashioned galvanized steel trash can, which I think everybody can picture. Um, if the town wanted to qualify for assistance funding the the cost of the car purchase through a pay as you throw grant, which would be approximately 150,000, that's the largest size allowed, 35 gallon. Um that would also qualify the town for pay as you throw points every year via the recycling dividends grant program which is RDP. Um if they do if they have that card size and charge for overflow um that based on the current value of those points that equates to an annual amount of about 5.5,000 dollars per year. Um, so this is from Susan. The city of Pittsfield chose to adopt a 45gallon cart size as their base size. And you do see in that database there are about 10 48gallon sizes in other towns around the state as well. So they they you know they they gave up the grant funding and the RDP funding, but they were able to reduce the total trash tonnage by at least 20%. By going to a smaller cart size of 45 gallons. Um so that that adds to the data that a smaller weekly trash limit helps reduce trash um generation. Um Susan, I assume they also do the overflow bags. Actually, I'm not sure. They do. Okay. Um, >> no, they don't. It's a little It gets a little complicated. No, they don't have pay you throw bags. They have um if they people can purchase a second 45gallon cart and pay um a month a six monthly, you know, six-month amount extra for that extra capacity. >> Okay, so there's a whole other way to do it. Um and she also added that there is data um a lot of data from DAP showing that weekly collection of 64gallon trash carts does generate more trash. It has immediately available capacity um and higher volumes higher volumes of trash lead to higher labor and fuel costs as well as higher tipping fees for the town. um and that large volumes of trash can um haulers may benefit financially from larger volumes of trash and disincentivize their commitment to trash reduction. So that was that was the commentary on trash cart size. Um, and I know we kind of left it as just deciding between 35 gallon and 45gallon, which you know, things to consider are possibility of grant funding with the 35gallon. If you do the overflow bags, smaller size, obviously 45gallon may be more acceptable to a lot of homeowners. Um, no grant funding possibility. Jennifer. >> Um, so again, in 10 municipalities in Massachusetts, I think you said they use 45 gallon. >> Yeah, for some reason they're all 48, but similar enough. I'm pretty sure that's what it is. I can look again. >> Um, okay. I I mean I tend to think the law the the 45 gallon um but I guess we can discuss and and some of that is anticipating push back if we insist on the 35 and I guess weighing that against grants that we would have to forfeit. I know I'm moving ahead to um the overflow bags, but I remember at the last council meeting when we I think George when you gave a TSO report and a couple of counselors were really concerned who whose districts include a lot of more rural areas that the bags were not bearproof. So, um yeah, I just want to put that out there. Will there, you know, how do we address that concern um about bags and animals being able to break through them? >> I'm going to since the time manager is not here, I'm a little nervous quoting him without him being present. But in a comment to me, he felt we should not be so much worried about uh the availability of grant funding. We should make a decision based on what we think is, you know, the most uh productive effective size um grant funding is nice but um if 45 is and maybe 45 will have grant funding too we I think it's not clear but maybe that is it's clear it's 35 or nothing but [clears throat] I think the real question is size in terms of trying to achieve the goals of the program um and especially for an initial uh new program 35 strikes me as very Susan has your hand up. And then Pam, >> I have a chart that MSDP produces every year based on um trash tonnage data that we get from municipalities that I can share with you. Just it's a visual explanation of how um the size of cart can affect the pounds per household uh within a community that's generated. There's there's a whole concept that I like to call the empty suitcase concept that when you're going on a trip, if you are limited to a carry-on size bag, you make it work. If you have a large bag that is going to be just the same price, you there's a tendency to fill it, right? And so it's all about immediate capacity. If you have a large trash cart, it's just that much easier just to throw stuff in, right? If you have a smaller trash cart, you think a little twice, oh, it's getting full. Well, maybe maybe that recycling can come out and I can make more room with it, right? So, it's just kind of like a human nature thing. But if I may, I can share this chart with you. Um, >> yep. >> Okay. Uh so this is based on 2025 data that um similar to from the same source from that you were given I think from Paul uh with municipal data. So you can see here um the communities with pay as you throw drop off programs or pay as you throw curbside programs with no carts. They produce less ton less tonnage per household annually than um communities with 95 g 96 gallon carts. I mean you can you can see the difference and in the at the bottom where it says the size that has the number of communities reporting uh data. So the uh actually the 48gallon carts only three communities had reported data in 2025 whereas we have 53 communities who have 64 gallon and 11 that have 95gallon and 17 that have 35gallon. So I just thought that this might be helpful for folks to see. We have uh similar graphs for the last um four or five years and and they all have the same trajectory. >> Pam, >> so I guess I fall into the blue bag category. Um but I think the I think the blue bag our blue bag is equivalent to that 35gallon >> tub. So, um, >> yes, >> with a with a household of two who are pretty careful about recycling, um, I go to the I go to the transfer station once every week and a half or two at the at the most. So, that's, um, I think it's certainly doable for many households. My question is, is it possible? I I think of a lot of student student homes. Um, we can we can encourage them to recycle. we can encourage them to um learn learn the tricks of the trade, but it seems like maybe we should offer the choice of a 35 or 45 and make them pay for that so that um those who are by nature less careful um end up covering more of the cost. >> Mimi Um, I just wanted to say I had it wrong. There actually are only four communities. I don't know why I thought there were more that had 48 gallon. >> Um, and I also just wanted to point out that in that graph there was a very small difference between the trash generation or the 35 and the 45. It was kind of interesting. >> Yeah, [clears throat] Andy. >> Yeah, I was going to say the same thing that um it looked like 45 you get about almost the same trash reduction as as others. And I'm I'm just a little concerned that we're going to get blowback from families that have, you know, substantial garbage needs and they're going to be like, well, you know, what about why why is it hitting us harder than than other folks? So, I don't know exactly how to deal with that, but I don't I guess I don't I don't want to seeing that makes me think the 45 is going to get us almost the same results as the 32 or whatever it is. And uh and even that is smaller than what a lot of uh municipalities are using and what and and what our current um hauler is generally um offering. So, it's just there's going to be some blowback and we have to anticipate that. I guess >> Susan, >> the the pay throw system is a utility-based pricing system. So to speak to Jennifer's concerns and and also um uh Pam and Andy's concerns, you know, when you use a lot of water in your household, you pay for it. And there are real costs involved with transporting trash, disposing of trash. And so what what the pay as you throw system does is it it charges people for the trash they produce just like we charge people for the electricity they use. And so yes, you start with a base unit and then if they if they use more than that, they need to pay for it. And that we know incentivizes people to um to produce less trash just like having high heating or water bills incentivizes people to take shorter showers. So, I I just wanted to throw that out that that's that's the whole concept of pay as you throw is to incentivize behavior change. >> Jennifer. >> Yeah. So, a a [clears throat] family of five or six could purchase could have the larger gallon, could have a 48. Vanessa, just >> it depends on how you structure it. I I mean you could you could have different size carts available and you could charge more for differentiz carts, but again with the the true pays you throw model it's it's um it's immediate capacity is what motivates people to make changes. So if you pay for a 95gallon trash can, that is not going to be incentivizing people to reduce their trash because they have this huge empty trash can at the beginning of every week. Um so it's um you guys can do the town can do whatever you want. It's just that I'm just trying to explain how the how the true pay as you throw model works. And so if we want if you want to uh use that as an incentive for waste reduction um as a consideration >> but what if we only provided the option for 35 or 45. >> I mean could we would have some kind of an overflow an overflow situation. So, either they could um either you have prepaid bags like some communities do or you could have them purchase and pay for a second cart. Um it's not ideal again because it it's not using the um but but it's but it still works. Plenty of communities do it and it works. I mean, the the concept is we're not going to tell you how much trash you should be producing, but if you produce a lot of trash, there are costs to that and you're going to have to pay them. Yeah. So, I think because I I do think there's a tendency, those of us on the committee tend to have smaller households, >> um, you know, so when we use ourselves as an example, that might not >> Right. I don't think yeah I don't think using ourselves as an example is probably a good you know as much as I love Pam hearing your stories I don't think you're the typical Ammerst citizen >> so you're looking at a slightly larger I mean in the ideal world you'd have a 35gallon for everybody and if you didn't fit it in you have to use pay as you throw bags um and that's just it and we could do that [clears throat] what I'm hearing is that look there a number of of of households in our community where that's really going to be a challenge. So you could say, okay, you can either have a 35 and then buy another one. You could pay for two or you could choose between 35 and 45 with a slight price increase for the 45. But after that, and you only get one and after that it all goes in the bags. So we got a number of possibilities here. Um, how do we sort through them? Um, I assume we have to decide. We can't turn to the vendor and say tell us what you think would work best. We have to tell them this is what we are going to require. Um either um one size and everything goes into bags or you get to choose two sizes, the second size costs more and after that everything goes into bags. Um I I've lost track of whose hand went up first. So I'm going to start with thank you with Pam. Go ahead Pam. Uh, thanks. I um I'm going to I'm going to withdraw the idea of having two choices. I think it sounds like the 45 gallon is essentially comparable in terms of incentive and 45 gallons for my household would be more than enough. Um, and and it probably would meet uh the needs of of many others in the community. So, no no choice. you'd like no choice and everything goes after that into a pay as you throw bag um next to the cart. And we'll talk about bears later. Um Andy, I mean I guess I guess my current vendor which is USA um is offers a choice. So they can handle different sizes. Um, but I was struck I mean the data that's that's like three or four towns that are using 45 uh sized bins. So I don't you know I was struck by the fact that the reduction was pretty similar for the 30 35 versus 45 or whatever it is. Um so I could go with that. Um you know again there's a number of folks in town who aren't even going to fill that. So is that but are they going to generate less waste if if they have a 32 30 you know 30ome versus 40ome you know I don't know I I like we got a letter recently from from somebody saying don't over complicate this and obviously it's going to be more complicated than it than it is now but um how can you know I guess one size is simpler and then overflow at uh so I'm just thinking out loud so I'll stop. >> No, it's okay. Susan >> um the I just want to point out that because there are only three towns reporting on that chart. It's small number statistics. Um so um it would be better if there were a lot more towns reporting. So, I don't want to I I um you know, you don't I don't want you to to focus on that as gospel that there's a really small differential between the two. Um we do know that Pittsfield was able to reduce they went they were going from a all you care to throw away program with bags to a single cart for for free and then anything beyond that you have to pay for. Um, and so that's one town, which is kind of anecdotal, but so I just wanted to put that out there just as kind of like a um a reality check. You know, it's like it is it is a reduction. Is it going to be as close to the 35 uh when there are more towns doing it? We don't know. I just wanted to point that out. >> Maybe. >> On the other hand, Pittsfield's a city, so that is actually a lot of residents. So that's a decent amount of data. Um I would just say that um 35 and 45 are are close enough in size that I agree that it probably doesn't make sense to offer both sizes. Just decide on a size if you're doing the overflow bags, one size and then overflow bags for anything extra. I think that is that simplifies it. >> Gilford. No. Okay. Let's talk about varmints. >> Hold on. Hold on. One one last. >> I want to get into the I really want to get to bears, but Okay. >> I want to Okay. I want to talk about bears. >> You do. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. That's what I want to talk about, too. >> So, a bear will get into a bin as well as a blue trash bag. So, there, you know, there's not much difference. Um, secondly, I just it occurred to me and I just want to make sure that we're noting in the in the document and in the RFP that we are actually a community of at the most 25,000 people because 15,000 live on campus and we and they do their own trash and Ammeris College does its own trash. So, um, let's make sure we don't overinflate our our potential cherry, the plum or the cherry that we're offering. Jennifer. >> Okay. So, I'm I am thinking of counselor Shane and the Bears. Uh I mean, she you know, and I think there's other counselors are very concerned about the bags. I mean, it almost sounded like it might be a deal breakaker >> for her. We have offer the bags. So can so so how do you know I don't in my immediate precinct you know bears and garbage aren't an issue so how is that dealt with and can is there a way to lock the bins I mean so yeah if bags are as if bins are as precarious and accessessible to bears as bags what what's happening now in those areas where it's a concern >> Susan I I actually have been doing some research on food scrap uh collection um and bears and there are um there are bearproof containers that can be purchased. Um I think Pam made an important comment that bears get into carts just as easily as they get into bags. And um some of it is timing of when you put it out. Um there are a whole bunch of different things that different communities have done. Uh we're looking at I I was looking at some information from Vermont which does have some curbside um programs where food composting is required. We also I looked at some information from Colorado. Um Seattle has areas where there are bears. They have curbside um composting as well. So there's just models that you can look at and learn from. Um but I don't see I agree there's not there's not going to be a huge difference between a cart that's unsecured and not bearproof and and a bag. So, um, if they're the my question is, are these people experiencing problems now with bears getting into their carts? And how is how do they think it's going to be different with a bag? And and that's assuming that the over that they use an overflow bag. If they don't use if they don't have a problem with them getting into the carts and then and they don't need an overflow bag, then there's no problem. But I would be surprised if they're not having problems with bears getting into the carts >> and maybe an incentive not to need an over um overflow bag. >> Right. Well, and also it's it's also timing. It's like when you put your trash out, you know, if you put it out at night Yeah. But that what are they doing now? I guess my point is what are they doing now to prevent bears and how is that going to change with a different size cart? >> Thank you. >> Good. Andy before Andy actually just note that town manager Paul Bachman has joined us. Andy. >> Hi Paul. Um I um part of the problem with bears getting into the bags is if people were putting organics in the bags, right? I mean it if we're trying to separate out compostable stuff, then the overflow in a bag is likely to be less organic and more just stuff that is trash. So, um, again, it's a certainly in enhanced incentive to to compost and then the compost is going to be a bin. I assume some sort of bin. So, I don't think the bag issue is it shouldn't be as, you know, as attractive as as it would be if you're just putting garbage in currently. Mimi, >> I mean, I would say it's a fairly easy behavior change to put your bags out in the morning. I know you [clears throat] might have to get up a little early, but I mean, I think that's the main way to avoid the bear the bear issues. So, >> okay, I'm here. I'm hearing two two points that that make sense and can be used in the discussion. There's going to be a concern a lot of people are going to raise, not just counselors. Um there'll be some behavioral changes necessary. Um and also if people are doing things right, there shouldn't be any food in the bags. Um and so um and bears are smart. They're not going to open a bag if there's no food in it. I'm not sure about raccoons and other kinds of critters, but we'll see. >> They're probably a bigger issue than bears. >> I think you're right, actually. um at least in my my neck of the woods. But your point is people are going to have to make some changes perhaps and also be more conscious of what they put if they're using overflow bags, what they put in them. Um so uh we've been talking a fair amount about trash and um I don't see any hands up at the moment. Uh I'm just going to say what I'm hearing and then have you all respond. Um, basically, um, the smaller size seems preferable, 35 versus 45. I'm just I'm not sure that's true, but that's what I'm hearing. Um, in order to incentivize I know we'll get to we'll get to descent in a moment. I'm just going to lay it out there and then have you all tell me how you'd like to change it or not. Um because I'd like maybe to leave here this morning at least with a sense of what at the moment what we think would be the best size of trash cart um combined with a pay as you throw and I'm hearing not two carts but one size um and the size is small rather than large. Thoughts on that Pam? Maybe with you first. Um I think I think I heard that the 45 was a was a compromise and perhaps a better fit if in fact the reduction is similar in with um what we what communities have seen with a 35gallon that I'm an anomaly and I would easily use a 35 but but I'm an anomaly so 45 seems to be a better average. Andy. >> Yeah, I heard 40. I thought [clears throat] we were headed toward 45 myself, but >> Jennifer, >> yeah, I agree with the 45. >> Well, that's only 3 to one and I'm the chair. So Susan, >> I just wanted to say I actually picked up a 45gallon cart from Pittsfield on Monday and I have it in my driveway. If you want to look and see what a 45gallon cart looks like, I'm happy to show it to you. I I'm borrowing it because the town of Shootsbury is going through a similar process. They are moving from a manual trash collection system to automated. And so they're going to have to select a cart size. And so they're making the same decisions that you are. So um like I say, if you want to look and see what a 45gallon cart looks like, give me a send me an email. I I bike by your house a lot. You'll also see your lovely garden. So uh 45gallon combined with pay as you throw bags frequency we're talking weekly I prefer bi-weekly but thoughts frequency So, bi-weekly it is. >> I mean, it did seem like Darcy was suggesting putting both in the RFP to ask if they It sounded like that's what she was suggesting. >> Well, that's an option, too. Um, I don't need to hear from people. Susan first and then Councelor Churchill. The frequency is going to depend largely on size of container and how soon you are going to uh require people to start composting because if you pick up right now there's just a handful of communities that pick up bi-weekly. It reduces cost significantly and that article that I sent you um talks about that that once you remove putricles from your trash and they don't stink as much you um and if you're if you're recycling you really don't need super frequent collect collection but if the putricals are in there waiting two weeks to have your stuff picked up um in July is is not a lot of fun and you you also need to think about what people are used to now. Um so it's very possible that with if you have um com food scrap collection that after people have m navigated and migrated to that and are really pulling out their putricals that you're not going to need weekly collection of your trash. But I would think that based on the fact that 60% or more of your households are used to weekly collection um that it would probably be smartest to to start with weekly collection at least initially in your first contract of trash. That would be what I would suggest. Andy. >> Yeah, I think what Susan said basically we can in the second contract if we were successfully implemented um >> we could stuff we could we could go to bi-weekly but I was I wouldn't take that away from folks right now. Nene. >> Um, well, I I agree with that, but um I was just going to note that there there Susan said there's only four communities that do bi-weekly and I was looking to see I'm assuming they have larger size containers because I think 45 every two weeks would be very hard for a lot of people. I know South Adley does it 64. They have a 64 picked up every other week. Yeah. Jennifer, >> I agree with um Andy. I think we should start at least with weekly. So what I'm hearing then is 45gallon weekly trash with pay as you throw bags. How do you get the pay as you throw bags? Uh, they're distributed to stores and sold. I mean, they can be sold at Stop and Shop, Big Y, hardware stores. >> I can't go to Guilford's office and get them. I would like to be able to No, I mean, how do I I get them? [laughter] He could have like a little He could have a side business. A little >> Different communities do >> different communities do different things. Okay. >> Yeah. You can you can sell them just like we sell them at the transfer station. You can sell them at town hall. Um there are some communities that are actually selling them in vending with vending machines um at town hall. Um you can sell them you can usually um if when you go when you live in Northampton, you can purchase paste you throw bags at any of the major grocery stores in Northampton. They even sell them at the at the co-op in Northampton. So there's lots of different ways you can make them. They it does require I mean I I want to be perfectly honest. It does require some administration. You need to purchase the bags, have them have them printed. You want a certain color. Um there are some bag vendors that are willing to do the distribution and handle the the distribution to the different grocery stores for you for a certain cost, a couple cents per bag that they get to keep. Um, some people find that the bag overflow is easier to administer than having differentiz carts because the differentiz carts require billing of all the different people. If they don't pay their bills, then you have to go collect the cart and replace the cart. So, um, you know, there's there's a tradeoff. Um, but I think that people typically find the overflow bag to be a little easier to administer. >> I'm not hearing choice of carts. I'm hearing one size cart with overflow bags. Um, I've lost track again. Anyone notice who went? Pam. Okay, Pam, go ahead. Uh it would be preferable to me that the that the sale of these bags goes to the town and not to Stop and Shop. I unless I mean that's a complicated um arrangement to do something with Stop and Shop. >> Yeah, they don't they don't I don't know that they get much if anything. I I don't know the the arrangement, but the the money does go to the town. They might get a few cents or something like that. I I don't know what the arrangement is. We could certainly talk to Waya Zero or some of the other bag um companies and see what what how that how that >> What would be the cost right now? What does it cost for one of these bags? I know what it costs for the town bags. It's $3 a bag. >> Now, that's typically what people charge about $3. >> Now, the town bag is ginormous. So, it's for trash. >> It's it's a 35gallon >> volume bag. Mhm. >> Okay. It would be basically the canoe bag. >> Some some communities >> some communities charge as little as a dollar, but if to cover all of your costs um and and cover the cost of the bag. Um and in some cases, some haulers will charge you to pick up bags. They they uh they want to charge like a dollar a bag or something like that to pick up bags because it means sometimes their drivers have to get out of the car >> and and pick it up. So, so you know, I would say plan for about $3 a bag >> and the bigger the bag the better. The smaller the bag, it doesn't matter. It comes in standard size. >> Well, standard size is the 35gallon like like it's used now at the transfer station, >> right? Okay. Thank you, >> Jennifer. >> No, I just think we should do what'sever easiest to administer. I mean >> Okay. So that would be >> which and what you're saying is that you don't want two different size carts. You just want a single size cart and you want the bags and we'll make the bags available in the usual ways and people have to buy them and uh Okay. >> You know, and maybe we look at a vendor the vendor doing that for us. We said there's services that for a few cents a bag, but that's >> Does that go in the RFP or is that something that uh gets sorted out after the fact? That's that's something you deal with with the bag with the bag manufacturer. >> So after the fact, so in the actual RFP, what we're going to say is one size cart uh pay as you throw bags um weekly pickup. >> Yep. >> Let me see. Nodding. That's always good. I like nodding. Maybe >> pay as you throw bags for overflow. >> Yes. Thank you. Right. >> Um, yeah, I will say from what I've seen the average it's normally $3 a bag and I think they're usually so sold in like groups of 10. Um, I mean I when I spoke with Tracy Deo, solid waste coordinator in Awam, she said it's fairly simple to administer. Um, she really prefers that to the idea of extra carts, even though I know we're not considering that. Um they do sell them in stores. She says the stores are happy to sell them because it's bringing in customers. Um and then they'll get some other things when they get the bags. Um it didn't seem too ownorous from her point of view. >> And believe it or not, it's exactly well yeah it's still 11:30 which is when I wanted to pause this discussion. Um I don't want to say it's my skillful management of time but um we have reached the end of item number four of a list of 10 and uh we not that we haven't been working hard we have but we still have to discuss at a future meeting recycling organics yard waste bulky waste transfer station and then public outreach. Um, so we've made good progress, but not quite even halfway. Though some of these might go quicker than some that we've discussed today. But I think Mimi, hopefully you have a sense at least in those four areas from our discussion um what the consensus at the moment of the committee is. And uh it sounds like we will be inviting you back with the manager's approval at our next meeting to continue this discussion. Okay, that sounds good. Um, I mean, I think you made really good progress. We got through some tricky questions. So, >> you you have a document or Paul has a document, I believe, that you mentioned at the very beginning of the meeting that I don't believe we've seen. So, it would be very important and maybe I misunderstood, but it sounded like you had sent to him something that um perhaps had a bit more detail um that we could look at in advance of our next meeting. Is that correct or did I misunderstand you? Yeah, if it's okay with Paul to share that with you. It had a lot more information about composting, yard waste, bulky waste. >> Okay. So, Paul, that's if if that's would help us in our discussion. I think we did pretty well today, but I know I at times felt like I was somewhat at sea. Um, but that may just be me. So, >> yeah, we can get that out to you for sure. >> Thank you. All right. So, uh, Mimi, thank you very much. Susan, as always, thank you very much. Um, you're certainly welcome to stay for the final 30 minutes of this meeting. We'd be delighted to have you, but I think you might have more important things to do. Um, so we hopefully our next meeting is September, is it September 17th? Yes, September 17th. And um, my assumption, but Paul will confirm this, is that we will see you both again at that date to hopefully get through this. >> It's checking my calendar. Yes, that works for me. >> Okay, >> great. I will see you then. >> Thank you very much. >> Thanks. Bye. >> So, I don't know about anyone else, but I'm exhausted. Um, but we still have one other task to take care of. The manager has brought us, I believe, four appointments that he would like us to recommend to the council. And um if I can find my agenda amongst this sea of papers. The first item I have here Paul is uh energy and climate action committee Caroline Gurich um for a term to expire June 30, 2029. >> Yes. So Caroline Gurich uh you have reviewed her for before for the CDBG committee and you approved her for the CDBG committee. She's also this is the person who is the administrator in um for CDBG um in the town of um is it weightely Hatfield for which town um and so she's worked with the energy committee there in weight so she works for the energy committee there as well and she's also in a mast's program so she's just really eager to be involved in different committees um we're looking desperately for people for the ECAC when we've had a conversation with the chair about reducing that number from 9 to 7. Um, and she's very open to that. Um, so I think we have one more slot. Um, we had one other person that we were hoping um to to put bring forward, but he chose not to move his his nomination forward. So um so this will bring them up to six. Um I think nor maybe this brings us to seven, I forget. Um, so that is for the energy and climate action committee. >> Good. Any questions from the committee for the manager? >> If not, I'm going to make a motion that we recommend the town council approve the town manager's appointment of Caroline Gurich to the energy and climate action committee for a term to expire June 30, 2029. >> Effective immediately. Yeah. Second. Thank you. Tenfirm. Going to move to a vote. Pam Rooney, >> yes. >> Andy Churchill, >> yes. >> Jennifer Todd, >> yes. >> And the chair is a yes. It's 40 with one absent. Next appointment, cultural council. Grace Zoo. >> Yes. Grace Zoo is uh she's a writer. She's relatively new to [clears throat] town, but interested in uh she's taught Chinese classical literature as well. Um, but she really is eager to bring her sort of more broader cultural experience from uh with Chinese literature to uh the town's decision-m process for cultural council. And again, this is a committee that we're really um we need membership on and we have very few applicants. So, this is um and but she has, you know, reviewed she reviewed the um she watched one of the cultural council meetings before. That's one of our sort of metrics that we always ask. Have you done your homework? Basically, have you watched the committee? Are you aware what they do? Are have you seen how they work? And then and then usually the resident advisory committee member also asks them, you know, what was your impression? Is there something we could be doing better type things. So, um, so yes, so we're recommending Grace Sue to serve on this committee. And the cultural council, just for reference, is the one that gives out the grants from the that we with money we get from the state. So, they usually give out small grants. Can be as small as $250, but can also go up to $2,2500. >> Questions for the manager? >> Seeing none, I'm going to make a motion that u the committee recommend the town council approve the appointment of Grace Zoo to the cultural council uh for a term to expire June 30, 2027. Is there a second? Second. >> Thank you. Churchill seconds. Can I move to a vote? >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> The chair. Is it I? Pam Rooney. >> Yes. >> Andy Churchill. >> Yes. >> So it's 401 absent. Uh next is historical commission. Michael Brown and Salabat Khan. >> Yes. So did I. Yes. Um so these are two members again. This is a committee that is looking commission that is looking for members. U Michael Brown has a lifelong nearly lifelong u resident of the town and hasn't been involved. But um the uh the the as we ask the chairs of committees to to do the chair has been reaching out to people to try and get me people to apply. Mr. Brown put his name forward. He's an attorney um and um is interested in historic preservation, although that's not a primary focus in his life, but he wants to be able to contribute to the town in some way. Uh Mr. Khan is a project designer with Riddle. Um and he he's about to become an architect if he passes his exams in and I think it's December, January, something like that. Uh he's been living in town for for about 5 years. very um you know uh knowledgeable about architecture and things like that. Um and once again a lot of these folks they say they want to give back to the committ to the community. Um and you know I just credit the chair of the historical commission for doing some outreach and recruiting new people to join. I just note in passing as I think the manager just mentioned historical commission currently has according to his document four vacancies. >> Yeah. Um >> energy and climate action also has four vacancies though it's been reduced hopefully will be reduced soon by one. Any questions for the manager on these two appointments? Seeing none, I'm going to move uh make the following motion that the TSO recommend the town council approve the following town manager appointments to the historical commission. Michael Brown for a term to expire June 30, 2029 and Salabad Khan for a term to expire June 30, 2027. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Rooney seconds. Thank you very much. Move to a vote. Council Churchill, >> yes. Jennifer Todd. >> Yes. >> Pam Rooney. >> Yep. >> And the chair also has an eyes with 401. Final uh is community preservation act committee. >> So the CPAC in uh is comprised of two different groups. One group is is representatives from each of the different committee from five different committees. Uh we've heard from the conservation commissions. They've designated Jason Dornney and the plane board has designated Roy Johnson. Uh we have not we have not seen a vote of the historical commission housing authority and recreation commission. I think they will be happening in the next week or so. Uh I think they've they've talked amongst themselves about who they will want to have represent themselves. So that will be coming to you in the near future. Um the other one is the atlarge and so you had previously appointed or approved the appointment of Michelle Lab to fill the atlarge seat. Subsequent to the action by the town council, she informed me that she had been um she had taken on a new job and could not take on this responsibility of serving on the on the CPAC committee. So the next person we had who was in after we had done the interviews, Robin Forom was the next person on the list. Um and so she had previously served the chair of the historical commission and had served on CPAC. So she's an experienced member. Uh and so so th those are the three names being put forward to you today. >> Questions for the manager? >> No, those are good. >> Seeing none, I'm going to move uh to a vote. I am going to vote I. Jennifer Tob, >> yes. >> Andy Churchill, >> yes. >> And Pam Rooney, >> yes. >> That's a good group. George, I don't think there was actually a motion before you. >> I was wondering about that. It's getting late in the morning for me. I did. I forget to make a motion. I probably did. So, let me Let's try that again. Rewind. >> Um, can I can I just read it read it to you because I have it here? >> Please go right ahead. >> Um, to recommend the town council approve the following town manager appointments to the community preservation act committee. Robin Forom as a member at large for a term to expire June 30, 2029. Jason Dhy as a conservation commission representative for a term to expire June 30, 2027 and Roy Johnson as a planning board representative for a term to expire June 30, 2027. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> And the motion's been made and seconded. >> Thank you. >> I vote I. Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> Andy Churchill. >> Yes. >> And Pam Rooney. Pam is being silent. Pam. >> So, she's frozen. >> I think she's frozen. Yeah. Uh >> oh. Well, we'll give her a second. See if she can unfreeze. Otherwise, it's going to be 300. We're too absent. >> Pam tuned in at 4:00 a.m. where she is. >> Oh, she's she's traveling. I didn't know that. Okay. Well, maybe she's falling asleep. [laughter] >> I don't think so. But >> so, the vote is three with two two absent. I don't like calling Pam absent, but she is. Yes, she now is absent. She's disappearing screen. >> Um, we have no minutes to approve, so we will hold that off. >> There are minutes in your packet, George. >> There are minutes in the packet. Okay, that's news to me. Um, Jennifer, did you see them? And I did. You didn't see them? >> I'm sorry. I didn't see them. They may be I was looking in the public packet. I They may be >> They're in places. I check. >> They Okay. Well, I missed them. Um, so that's my fault. >> We only have one member who's actually read them, >> so we'll have to postpone that till next meeting, and I apologize. >> That's all right. Um, future agenda items. At the moment, it looks like our next meeting will be taken up with the second half of the decision points. We made some, I think, decent progress today. We still have a fair amount of work to do. um we may have a few more manager appointments but I can't imagine the next meeting if in fact it is devoted to this topic um having room for anything else if that's the case we still have outstanding um the street lights policy and meeting with the vendor um I think in our conversation brief as it was this morning with the manager about boards and committees um we've already had at least one mention and there others where we're hoping for a possibility of reducing the size of some of these bodies. And that gets us to the resident advisory committee survey, which I have not heard anything about yet, which means I need to reach out again to RAAC and to the chair and see if they've made any progress over the summer. We're kind of waiting on them and that survey to then proceed to that topic. And I would like to see us finish with this before the year is done. Um, and come back to the council since it was something given to us for this year to sort of report back. Um, and so street lights, boards and committees, and then finally fields. Uh, none of which I think we are in the condition of dealing with at least in the short term. I will re I will reach out to RAC and see what's happening with the survey. Jennifer. >> Um, yes. Now, I don't know if this is housekeeping I should discuss with you offline, but in terms of the refuge collection bylaw, bylaw 3.33, we now have two more sponsors to that the proposed amendment of that bylaw, the waist holler bylaw, because we've lost two sponsors over the year. Um Andy Steinberg and Shalin and uh counselors Brevik and Cano Martin um have volunteered to sign on as I guess you'd call replacement sponsors and we are working on I guess I think you had requested this George updating those proposed amendments so that because there was some confusion. We had the original proposed amended bylaw that was referred to TSO a number of years ago and then there was another copy that I think uh Shallony had worked on during her last session on the council. So we wanted to bring another sort of clean copy and I don't you know so we can you can decide when what is the best agenda and you know week of the meeting to schedule that. >> Okay. But that would seem to be something that should be done sooner rather than later. >> Yeah. >> And um the question is whether we would have time at the next meeting. I'll have to give that some thought. But um and we can talk about this offline as well. >> Thank you. >> Any other thoughts about future agenda items or any sense of prioritization um amongst this list at the moment? As I said, I will reach out on the boards and committees and get information for you for the next meeting and tell you where that stands. Um, but at the moment I think it's all hands on deck for the waist hauler. >> And Paul, is that your understanding? Okay. >> I I think that's a really smart way to go. I mean, this our number one priority right now is get the waist hauler thing cleaned up and ready to go. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Um, it is 11:47. Um, I guess we could have spent another 15 minutes on waist hauler, but you never know. Um, so I am prepared to make a motion to adjurnn. second. >> And I certainly think that would be a good idea. Uh Andy Churchill. >> Yes. >> Jennifer Tob. >> Yes. >> And I think Pam, you're back. >> Yeah. I got frozen out. >> Pam, are you willing to tell us where you are? Is that is that public knowledge or you're just not you're not in Ammerst? >> And apparently >> the time zone is not in your favor either, but >> No, I'm four. I'm It's now quarter of eight. >> Wow. Okay. Well, appreciate very much your attendance. Um, see you all on September 17th. >> And I vote I to >> Oh, I'm sorry. And that was an I for adjourning. Yes. So, it's 4 Z with one absent. We're adjourned. Okay. >> Thank you.