 |
| John Diacogiannis and Steve Salvesen |
Before deciding on the bid itself, Supervisors wrestled with the 2-day v. 4-day argument.
Leading the charge for sticking with the current 2-day schedule, which will be more expensive, is Supervisor Jack Nagle. He had three arguments. First, he complained about the aesthetics, arguing that people would see garbage every day. Second, he worried that the schedule would get backed up when it snows. Finally, he is concerned residents will be upset. "People don't like change," he argued.
Echoing Nagle, Supervisor Steve Salvesen stated that a four-day trash collection schedule would be contrary to the best interests of the Township. "On windy days, we'll have garbage flying all through the Township."
On the other side of this question was Supervisor Mark Tanczos, who argued that what concerns residents the most "is saving every cent they can." Chairman John Diacogiannis sided with Tanczos. He noted snow days are always a mess, regardless whether trash is picked up twice or four days a week. "The savings to me are still significant," he concluded.
Sam Augustine, the Director of Sales at Republic, asked to address the Supervisors, but Solicitor Jim Broughal shut him off. He told Supervisors they already have bid packages, and that is all they should consider. "I just don't think it's fair that you listen to one without listening to all," he advised. "My recommendation is that you listen to none."
Supervisor Glenn Walbert was absent, and it will be up to him to break the deadlock when Supervisors meet again to award the bid on January 24, 7 PM, at the Municipal Building located at 3630 Jacksonville Road.
Tanzos
ReplyDeleteThe beer Tanzos?
Yep. One and the same.
ReplyDeleteThis is what you get when you have elected officials who know nothing about trash spouting what they think. Take the deal and save the money. Do what is best for the tax payer.
ReplyDeleteThe one rep should have been allowed to talk. If the others didn't show that's their problem. Lawyers are such wimps.
If the bid process is fair and the bids were already received, what's wrong with gathering a little education? We're they afraid they'd suddenly become dishonest with the bid process? Curious.
ReplyDeleteYou have to be kidding me. Elected officials would take a more expensive alternative. Thank God Salvesen wasn't elected county controller.
ReplyDeleteWe'll take the cheaper plan otherwise we'll complain. We're going to complain anyway about the change because, well, it's our "right" to irrationally complain. We won World War II.
ReplyDeleteYours,
The pretty accurate elderly stereotype that wouldn't dare include references to tapioca pudding and those damn kids on the lawn
It would seem to me in today's economy all rationale members of the HT Board would be doing everything possible to keep $'s in their residents pockets.
ReplyDelete3 or 4 years ago there was no charge for garbage pickups. For a budgetary reason(?)these experts institute a garbage fee instead of lumping the charge to your tax bill, so in essence your taxes go up and yet you cant deduct the full amount from overall income taxes. Now a chance to lessen the burden and there is actially a debate over giving residents a break? Nagle and the rest had no problem approvong the garbage fee in the first place, which was the biggest change (ie:tax increase) hanover had ever seen. Talk about being out of touch? This takes the cake. How about using some of the current surpluls to lower or eliminate this entirely?
ReplyDeleteanon 4:10, the Callahan Clan has perfected the hidden fee tax for years. Sadly that practice is an epidemic in government.
ReplyDeleteHey anonymous, I own commercial property in the township and when the trash was in the tax bill I was paying for your trash collection. Wake up, they got it right 3 or 4 years ago when it was removed from my tax bill. Hopefully now they'll take the less expensive route.
ReplyDeleteSo if the issue was fairness and you were "paying for my garbage pickup" then the field was leveled, then you got to deduct a larger tax bill in the past and still get an expense deduction today, so it could be said i am paying for some of yours? Regardless, and not sure how the garbage was billed/taxed comercially, the lower rate should be pursued and some of the surplus looked at to offset the costs.
ReplyDeleteIoffset the cost of your trash collection and I paid for my own trash collection. Your welcome!
ReplyDeleteHaving owned commercial property in Hanover for years you live in one of the best, if not the best,municipalities in the valley. First to plow streets, first to pick up leaves, first to do just about everything.
Hopefully they'll lower your trash bill to the lowest possible.
Count your blessings and stop bitching.
Never bitched or said it wasnt well run. Youhave a chance to lower a bill to residents and it should be done
ReplyDeleteI guess you own the twp consideing you footed the bill for 2500+ homes. Congrats on owning property and I hope you are doing well but you are either full of horse dung or full of yourself. I'll go with both
Why not get out of the trash business? Let the taxpayers hire their own garbage man. It has worked for decades in the City and Bethlehem Township. Government should be trying to cut its programs and services.
ReplyDeleteSeems these guys need to listen to Tanczos. Save the people money! Nagle is lucky no one ran against him. He has no vision!
ReplyDeleteRead just about the same article in the Bethlehem Press today. Hanover residents need to pack the Board of Supervisors meeting and send a clear message. "We want the hauler who will cost the residents the least amount of money over the course of whatever agreement is approved." Compare what I'm paying now to what I'll be paying in the future. It's what needs to come out of my checking account for trash collection in the future. We pay a lot less than my friends in the City who contract for their own and hopefully it's even a greater savings going forward. Do what is best ($$$$$$$$$) for the taxpayer.
ReplyDelete