|
|
|
|
End for recycling is temporarily put on hold |
|
Written by Publisher
|
|
Saturday, 21 March 2009 |
Photo by Ted Lutz
A forum was held Friday in Smethport to discuss the future of trash recycling in McKean County. Taking part in the meeting are, from left to right: Al Pingie, McKean County commissioner; Rich Godshall, president of Rustick LLC, operator of the former county landfill; and State Rep. Martin Causer (R-Turtle Point).
By Ted Lutz
Republican Staff
SMETHPORT – Rustick LLC has agreed to temporarily postpone its plan to remove 36 collection bins from 25 recycling sites in McKean County.
Rustick, a private company, operates the former county landfill in Hutchins. The company maintains the community recycling bins as a courtesy at no charge to the county and its boroughs and townships.
The city of Bradford is the only county municipality with state-mandated recycling.
Richard L. Godshall, president of Rustick, said Friday that the company had plans to remove its collection bins by April 1 due to declining prices for recyclable items such as cardboard, paper, plastic bottles and aluminum cans.
Godshall now is willing to wait at least a week before removing the bins.
There are four bins at the Kane recycling area in a parking lot on North Fraley Street. Other area bins are located in Ludlow, Wetmore Township and Mt. Jewett.
Godshall was one of the speakers at a recycling forum Friday at the Court of the Angels Restaurant in Smethport. About 50 municipal representatives attended the meeting, which was a follow-up to a recycling forum held five weeks ago at the same site.
According to Godshall, Rustick has been losing between $8,000 and $10,000 per month on its recycling program since the market for recyclables plummeted in October. He said the company couldn’t continue to sustain these losses. He previously said that Rustick would be “happy” just to break even with the recycling program.
Joe DeMott, chairman of the McKean County Board of Commissioners, asked municipalities to “let us know” if they are able to “pay for this service (recycling)” until the markets for recyclables recover.
He said the county needs municipal “feedback” to relay to Rustick, which will then determine the fate of the voluntary recycling program.
DeMott said the county “doesn’t have the money” to subsidize recycling.
If the collection bins are removed across the county, there appears to be three options for residents in disposing of their recyclable items. These options include:
*Traveling to the Rustick landfill to deposit recyclables in collection bins at that site.
*Disposing of recyclables along with their other garbage picked up by garbage collection companies. Speakers at the forum speculated that this option could prompt garbage collectors to raise their rates since they would be hauling more tons to the landfill.
*Dumping bottles, cans and other trash in the woods or along rural roads. Norwich Township Supervisor Butch Schaffer said the municipalities need to “have a plan” for recycling so this illegal option is taken away.
“We don’t want to see stuff dumped along the road,” he said.
As the volunteer recycling program now stands, there is no cost to residents or the county and its townships and boroughs.
“We are not able to do it for free anymore,” Godshall said.
He said Rustick at one time was able to sell recyclables to at least cover its costs for emptying and maintaining the collection bins. Due to the drastic dip in the economy, the market for recyclable items has dried up, he pointed out.
“We all want to recycle and be good stewards,” State Rep. Martin Causer (R-Turtle Point) said. “But if there isn’t a market for it, it makes for a very difficult situation.
“I don’t blame Rustick. They can’t sustain losses.”
“If the markets were there, recycling would take care of itself,” Wetmore Township David 'Chip' Peterson said.
Mt. Jewett Councilman Wil Antrim said there’s an “assumption” that “recycling is free. It’s no longer free,” Antrim said. “Somebody has to pay for it.”
The state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) now assesses a special fee of $2 per ton for garbage hauled to the Rustick landfill and other landfills in the state. This fee is earmarked to aid recycling programs.
Several speakers called for the elimination of this fee. Rustick pays approximately $100,000 a year to DEP just for this special fee. If the fee were removed, it was noted that Rustick apparently would be financially able to continue the volunteer recycling program in the county.
Causer said state legislators have asked DEP to cease collection of the $2 per ton “recycling tipping fee.” But he pointed out that any action on the state level “won’t happen overnight.” He said he has “no solution to help you this week.”
Although the $2 per ton collected by DEP is earmarked for recycling, DEP grants for recycling are drying up.
Mark Adams, a field representative for State Sen. Joe Scarnati (R-Brockway), said a budget proposal from Gov. Ed Rendell calls for the suspension of the recycling grants. The state, however, still intends to collect the $2 per ton fee for recycling, it was pointed out.
John Peterson, the Bradford city clerk, said the city now spends $100,000 a year for equipment and manpower for its state-mandated recycling program.
“We’re mandated,” Peterson said. “That’s the real problem.”
Peterson said that, in the past, Bradford has received state grants to help with its recycling program. Without state aid, he is concerned that the annual mandated recycling costs could total as much as $150,000.
Peterson said Bradford faces a “Catch 22 situation.” “We’re mandated to recycle, but there’s no market,” he said.
If Rustick suspends its county recycling program, there are concerns about the future of recycling in McKean County.
“We’d hate to see a suspension,” Godshall said. “It would be hard to start back up.”
Kane Councilman Jim Salvamoser said the county and Rustick will need to “pound out to the people” that the recycling bins are “gone” if the program is suspended.
|
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 30 July 2009 )
|
|
|
|
