Debris flying out the back of trash trucks heading back and forth to the Covanta trash-to-energy plant is making a mess of the city’s 229 Technology Park, according to some businesses there.
The businesses are also worried about excessive speed by the trash trucks, including some owned by the city, as they dash to the garbage-burning plant. CLICK HERE FOR STORY.
*******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Showing posts with label trash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trash. Show all posts
May 6, 2010
November 13, 2009
City eyes trash can advertising
To raise revenue, the city is exploring the idea of putting advertising on the side of residential trash bins.
They’d be like “mini-billboards” on both sides of the wheeled receptacles the city distributes to residents to toss their trash.
The idea, which a public works committee is looking into, hasn’t been fully explored and hasn’t received the blessing of any public officials. It remains unclear how much money could be generated if the city were to try to sell advertising space on garbage cans.
“We don’t have all the details on this,” Mayor Art Ward said Friday.
The committee exploring the concept is eyeing the possibility of selling advertising space on both sides of the rubbish collection barrels that have been distributed throughout the city for use with the automated trash trucks.
The Miscellaneous Matters Committee of the Public Works Board said it would like to hear particulars about the proposal before considering whether to proceed with it or not. Its recommendation would be sent to the public works panel.
While many cities around the country have sold advertising space on public waste barrels on downtown streets, the idea of selling advertising space on residential barrels is at least unusual.
Ward said the city agreed to investigate the concept after someone suggested the idea.
He said that officials “entertain ideas and suggestions from the public” and unless they’re way out there, they take seriously the responsibility to check into the proposals.
People need to know, he said, that if they come forward with concepts, city leaders will treat them respectfully and that the proposals “will be looked into and scrutinized” to see if the city can benefit from trying it.
“People have to understand that these are ideas that come forth” and that first-line subcommittees exist to consider them, the mayor said.
That an idea is explored doesn’t mean anything will ever come of it, Ward said.
“We’re not going to make a decision until we have all the details,” the mayor said.
At this point, he said, the committee is waiting for more information. He said he doesn’t when, or if, any more information will be offered by anyone.
The city is facing a fiscal crunch that has officials eyeing any proposals that could bring in revenue without socking taxpayers.
*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
November 11, 2009
Garbage advertising
Get this, from the September meeting of the Public Works Board's Miscellaneous Matters Committee:
Advertising on Bristol’s trash bins
The Committee had a general discussion the concept of allowing ads to be placed on both sides of the automated rubbish collection barrels for a yearly fee and determined that it [Miscellaneous Matters Committee] would not rule out the concept but would like to have a presentation on the details of the program before proceeding any further. No action taken. The Committee went on to say that an update on the status of the concept should be provided in person or in writing for the next meeting of the Miscellaneous Matters Committee.
*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
August 27, 2008
Yard waste program costs to rise sharply
The cost of participating in the city’s yard waste collection program is set to rise sharply.Those choosing to participate in the green waste collection program will pay 70 percent more next year than they have had to shell out for the past several years.
A city panel recently agreed to hike the fee from $50 to $85 annually in order to cover the expense of running the program.
City Councilor Mike Rimcoski, who voted for the change in committee, called the increase “ridiculous” and insisted that the City Council should have a shot at trimming it back.
Rimcoski said that with so many residents scrimping to pay for fuel and taxes, there’s no excuse for hitting up residents for such a whopping increase in one program.
Mayor Art Ward said he wishes that the cost didn’t require such a large percentage increase.
But, he said, it’s important that a voluntary program covers its costs so that taxpayers as a whole don’t wind up subsidizing a service that is not required.
The mayor said that city officials need to do a better job of staying on top of rising costs so that increases are done regularly instead of waiting for years and then socking taxpayers with “phenomenal increases.”
“It’s not fair to the taxpayers to experience sticker shock,” Ward said.
Bristol is one of the few municipalities in the state to offer curbside yard waste collection.
The city started offering the fee-based, curbside program a decade ago after state environmental regulators barred anyone from tossing grass clippings, tree branches and other yard-related leftovers in the garbage.
Most towns have done nothing to help residents cope with the state-mandated ban on yard waste in trash.
The $50 annual fee has been in place since at least 2001.
Officials said when they began the program that giving people the chance to put out one big barrel of yard waste weekly is a benefit to many.
They also said they would continue the program as long as it supported itself. They said they wouldn’t subsidize its expense.
But as fuel costs rose and employee salaries went up, the fee remained the same until this year.
Ward said that he hopes every department at City Hall will take a look at its services and make sure that the fees charged cover as much of the cost as they should.
That’s one way to hold down next year’s budget and limit tax hikes, he said.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
March 5, 2008
Garbage and recycling fees to remain the same
The regional trash agency won’t hike the fees charged to Central Connecticut towns, including Bristol and New Britain, for using the Covanta incinerator in Bristol.
“As a result of vigilant management and prudent financial planning,” said New Britain Mayor Timothy Stewart, “we were able to hold the line on the tipping fee for the fourth consecutive year.”
Bristol Resource Recovery Facility Operating Committee officials said in a prepared statement that the ability to control expenses, a stable revenue picture and the availability of reserve funds combined to keep the tipping fee competitive
“Given the tough economic conditions facing our taxpayers and municipalities,” agency officials are “extremely pleased” that a recently adopted $24 million budget won’t increase the rates paid by the 14 municipalities that use the facility, said Stewart, who chairs the agency.
The Tunxis Recycling Operating Committee, which serves many of the same communites, is holding its $35.50 charge for taking a ton of curbside recycling steady for the sixth straight year.
The trash tipping fee will remain at $65.50 per ton, which costs both Bristol and New Britain a bit more than $3 million annually.
Branford First Selectman Anthony DaRos, who serves as the agency’s treasurer, said that the BRRFOC will use reserve funds to help subsidize costs and maintain the tipping fee.
DaRos said the agency is planning to use $1.5 million from its rainy day fund to balance the coming year’s budget.
The agency’s executive director, Jonathan Bilmes, said that the costs associated with operating and maintaining the Covanta trash burning plant are slated to rise about $380,000 because of inflation.
But, he said, “we expect to offset that increase with savings in several key areas, including a reduction in property taxes assessed on the Covanta plant and a reduction in the cost of disposing of bypass waste.”
The bypass waste, which is sent elsewhere when the Bristol burner is too busy or down, will likely cost more than $1.7 million to deal with, Bilmes said. Another major agency expense is shipping the incinerator ash to a landfill.
Bilmes said that the decision to create “an ash/bypass reserve fund several years ago” helps and show why it is important for the agency “to move ahead on cost-effective waste disposal contingencies, such as the reactivation of the New Britain Transfer Station on Christian Lane in Berlin, which we hope will get off the ground in the coming year.”
The agency makes about $8 million annually selling electricity, a figure it expects to rise a bit.
The regional trash agency makes its money mostly by selling electricity and charging by the ton for the trash burned at the plant. At least 180,000 tons will be burned in the year that starts in July.
Among the municipalities whose garbage winds up in the Bristol trash burner are New Britain, Berlin, Plainville, Plymouth, Bristol, Southington, Wolcott, Branford, Prospect, Seymour, Warren, Washington, Hartland and Burlington.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
“As a result of vigilant management and prudent financial planning,” said New Britain Mayor Timothy Stewart, “we were able to hold the line on the tipping fee for the fourth consecutive year.”
Bristol Resource Recovery Facility Operating Committee officials said in a prepared statement that the ability to control expenses, a stable revenue picture and the availability of reserve funds combined to keep the tipping fee competitive
“Given the tough economic conditions facing our taxpayers and municipalities,” agency officials are “extremely pleased” that a recently adopted $24 million budget won’t increase the rates paid by the 14 municipalities that use the facility, said Stewart, who chairs the agency.
The Tunxis Recycling Operating Committee, which serves many of the same communites, is holding its $35.50 charge for taking a ton of curbside recycling steady for the sixth straight year.
The trash tipping fee will remain at $65.50 per ton, which costs both Bristol and New Britain a bit more than $3 million annually.
Branford First Selectman Anthony DaRos, who serves as the agency’s treasurer, said that the BRRFOC will use reserve funds to help subsidize costs and maintain the tipping fee.
DaRos said the agency is planning to use $1.5 million from its rainy day fund to balance the coming year’s budget.
The agency’s executive director, Jonathan Bilmes, said that the costs associated with operating and maintaining the Covanta trash burning plant are slated to rise about $380,000 because of inflation.
But, he said, “we expect to offset that increase with savings in several key areas, including a reduction in property taxes assessed on the Covanta plant and a reduction in the cost of disposing of bypass waste.”
The bypass waste, which is sent elsewhere when the Bristol burner is too busy or down, will likely cost more than $1.7 million to deal with, Bilmes said. Another major agency expense is shipping the incinerator ash to a landfill.
Bilmes said that the decision to create “an ash/bypass reserve fund several years ago” helps and show why it is important for the agency “to move ahead on cost-effective waste disposal contingencies, such as the reactivation of the New Britain Transfer Station on Christian Lane in Berlin, which we hope will get off the ground in the coming year.”
The agency makes about $8 million annually selling electricity, a figure it expects to rise a bit.
The regional trash agency makes its money mostly by selling electricity and charging by the ton for the trash burned at the plant. At least 180,000 tons will be burned in the year that starts in July.
Among the municipalities whose garbage winds up in the Bristol trash burner are New Britain, Berlin, Plainville, Plymouth, Bristol, Southington, Wolcott, Branford, Prospect, Seymour, Warren, Washington, Hartland and Burlington.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
February 13, 2008
I don't think the TV station broke the law
From Bristol's code book:
Sec. 10-33. Scavenging prohibited.
(a) It shall be a violation of this article for any person to scavenge recyclable or any solid waste for pecuniary gain. Scavenging shall include collecting, recovering, hauling, storing or disposing of recyclable or any solid waste other than as authorized by this article.
(b) Each occurrence of scavenging in violation of this article shall constitute a separate offense.
(c) The board of public works may establish a swap area at the transfer station where people using the transfer station could leave items that may have some value or reuse for others and/or pickup items for reuse.
(Ord. of 6-12-01)
Sec. 10-45. Salvaging, scavenging.
No salvaging or scavenging shall be allowed at any solid waste disposal area or facility unless authorized by the board of public works.
(Ord. of 6-12-01)
If these are the only city code sections that apply to searching through someone's garbage, I don't see how they apply to a TV station looking for recyclables in an official's trash can.
In the first law concerning scavenging, the ordinance says it is a violation for anyone "to scavenge recyclable or any solid waste for pecuniary gain."
Unless the television station personnel sold the junk mail they pulled out of Frank Nicastro's trash can, I can't see how they made any money off it. Perhaps they found a buyer for Ken Cockayne's empty honey bottle, but I doubt it. And the aerosal can from Mike Rimcoski's house? I suspect it has no market value.
Without "pecuniary gain" -- making money -- there is no violation. Everything else in that section is dependent on the idea that somebody's turning a profit by swiping recyclables or garbage.
The other section applies only to "any solid waste disposal area or facility." I suppose one could argue that the barrels in front of residents' houses are a "solid waste disposal area," particularly since they belong to the city. In addition, there seems to be a distinction between an "area" and a facility, which would presumably mean the transfer station or other obvious public works site.
But I think it really means that they don't want people rifling through stuff that's already been collected somewhere, which makes sense.
In any case, it sure seems that if there's an interest in barring someone from going through trash cans, the law ought to be a whole lot more clear.
As it is, I would argue that unless there's some other law that hasn't been called to my attention, there is no doubt the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom to the press outweighs whatever slim argument you could make that one of those statutes prohibited the station from taking a look at officials' trash to see if they were breaking the laws they are sworn to uphold.
Update: Back in 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police did not need a warrant to search garbage left on the curb of a California home. The justices said that people could have no reasonable expectation of privacy for items left on the curb for the express purpose of having strangers haul them off. At the time, the justices cited a 1967 decision to bolster the court's ruling. That earlier decision said, "“What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection.”
What that means is federal law doesn't protect the privacy of garbage.
It's possible, though, that Connecticut's state law or its Constitution offers more protection. I don't know. I also can't say for certain that Bristol itself doesn't have some other law that might be relevant to digging through somebody's trash.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Sec. 10-33. Scavenging prohibited.
(a) It shall be a violation of this article for any person to scavenge recyclable or any solid waste for pecuniary gain. Scavenging shall include collecting, recovering, hauling, storing or disposing of recyclable or any solid waste other than as authorized by this article.
(b) Each occurrence of scavenging in violation of this article shall constitute a separate offense.
(c) The board of public works may establish a swap area at the transfer station where people using the transfer station could leave items that may have some value or reuse for others and/or pickup items for reuse.
(Ord. of 6-12-01)
Sec. 10-45. Salvaging, scavenging.
No salvaging or scavenging shall be allowed at any solid waste disposal area or facility unless authorized by the board of public works.
(Ord. of 6-12-01)
If these are the only city code sections that apply to searching through someone's garbage, I don't see how they apply to a TV station looking for recyclables in an official's trash can.
In the first law concerning scavenging, the ordinance says it is a violation for anyone "to scavenge recyclable or any solid waste for pecuniary gain."
Unless the television station personnel sold the junk mail they pulled out of Frank Nicastro's trash can, I can't see how they made any money off it. Perhaps they found a buyer for Ken Cockayne's empty honey bottle, but I doubt it. And the aerosal can from Mike Rimcoski's house? I suspect it has no market value.
Without "pecuniary gain" -- making money -- there is no violation. Everything else in that section is dependent on the idea that somebody's turning a profit by swiping recyclables or garbage.
The other section applies only to "any solid waste disposal area or facility." I suppose one could argue that the barrels in front of residents' houses are a "solid waste disposal area," particularly since they belong to the city. In addition, there seems to be a distinction between an "area" and a facility, which would presumably mean the transfer station or other obvious public works site.
But I think it really means that they don't want people rifling through stuff that's already been collected somewhere, which makes sense.
In any case, it sure seems that if there's an interest in barring someone from going through trash cans, the law ought to be a whole lot more clear.
As it is, I would argue that unless there's some other law that hasn't been called to my attention, there is no doubt the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom to the press outweighs whatever slim argument you could make that one of those statutes prohibited the station from taking a look at officials' trash to see if they were breaking the laws they are sworn to uphold.
Update: Back in 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police did not need a warrant to search garbage left on the curb of a California home. The justices said that people could have no reasonable expectation of privacy for items left on the curb for the express purpose of having strangers haul them off. At the time, the justices cited a 1967 decision to bolster the court's ruling. That earlier decision said, "“What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection.”
What that means is federal law doesn't protect the privacy of garbage.
It's possible, though, that Connecticut's state law or its Constitution offers more protection. I don't know. I also can't say for certain that Bristol itself doesn't have some other law that might be relevant to digging through somebody's trash.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Recycling rules violated by most city leaders
When state Rep. Frank Nicastro tossed some junk mail in the trash last week, he probably didn’t think much about it.
City Councilor Ken Cockayne said he certainly wasn’t thinking about recycling mandates when he winged an empty honey bottle in his garbage.
And city Councilor Mike Rimcoski said he, too, threw junk mail into his trash can. An aerosal can found its way into the barrel as well, but the councilor pinned the blame for that on his wife.
All of them fessed up after a Hartford television station dug through their rubbish barrels recently – perhaps violating a city ordinance in the process – and confronted them for a story that will apparently air next week.
"I apologize for putting junk mail in my trash," said Nicastro, a Democrat who is also a city councilor. "I'll try to do better."
The city-issued trash cans put out at the curb in front of each of the six city councilors’ homes – and Mayor Art Ward’s – were pawed through for evidence that glass, metal, plastic or paper that should have been recycled was instead lumped in with everyday debris.
It appears that all of them violated recycling rules to at least some degree.
"We are human beings," Ward said, and make mistakes.
“I plead guilty,” Rimcoski confessed. He said it was more convenient to throw his junk mail in the trash than put it in the blue recycling bin that gets put out every two weeks.
George Wallace, the assistant public works director, said that city crews routinely tag barrels where recycling is found so that residents will recycle properly in the future.
But, he said, they haven’t checked on political leaders specifically.
“None of our people found it,” Wallace said.
Ward said that everyone in town, including City Hall’s bosses, could do better recycling.
In fact, the city has a pilot program in place that aims to increase dramatically the amount of material that is recycled.
About 900 residents – 2 percent of the city – got large recycling bins that can be emptied by the same kind of one-armed trucks that are used for garbage cans. They were told to throw all of their recyclables in the new barrels.
Wallace said that recycling rates shot up 97 percent in the targeted area, producing so much extra recycling that the regional recycling agency posted its best month ever in January almost solely because of more recycling from that one little area of southeastern Bristol.
Ward and Nicastro said that Bristol’s success with the single stream recycling test probably prompted Channel 61 to dig through its leaders’ garbage to check for violations.
City Councilor Kevin McCauley pointed out that none of the council members or Ward live in the recycling test area.
Public Works Director Walter Veselka said the city’s anti-scavenging ordinance prohibits anyone from rooting around in other peoples’ garbage.
The Press considered checking for recycling violations by municipal leaders earlier this winter, but chose not to do it because of concerns that it could lead to criminal charges. There were also worry about safety and violating peoples' privacy.
Still, it’s unlikely anyone will pursue charges against the station’s personnel, officials said.
Wallace said he hopes the recycling flap will shine a light on the need to recycle.
“A lot of people just don’t quite understand it,” Wallace said.
The city has plenty of incentive to encourage recycling.
It forks over $65.50 per ton to burn trash at the Covanta incinerator in Bristol, but only shells out only $33.50 per ton to have its recyclables processed. In short, it costs about half as much to get rid of recyclables as it does to deal with garbage.
For taxpayers, that means every item recycled saves money. If the whole town recycled at the same rate as the residents of the pilot program area, the annual savings would easily top $100,000.
Still, everyone involved recognizes the system will never be perfect.
Cockayne said that among his violations was throwing out “a small piece of unused tin” that he never thought would be on the recyclable list.
He said that he’s shredded his junk mail for a long time – taking it to the office to run it through the machine – because he worried that if he put it in the trash, private information could wind up in the wrong hands.
Now that his garbage has been raided, Cockayne said, he knows that was a good idea.
Nicastro said that the incident highlights his own efforts to get state legislation enacted that would protect Social Security numbers better. He said the violation of privacy that comes from digging through trash shows how vulnerable everyone is.
Ward said he didn’t know exactly what he did wrong yet. He added, though, that he recycles regularly."Maybe somebody put stuff in our trash," Ward joked.
Here's what recycled in Bristol:
Materials Collected:
Clean glass and metal food containers
Plastics #1 and # 2: (Please check the bottom of the container for the recycle symbol and number)#1 (PET -polyethylene terephthalate) is typically soda, liquor, cooking oil, and other transparent liquid food containers. #2 (HDPE -high density polyethylene) is typically 1 gallon milk jugs, spring water, detergent, and bleach containers. *Except those that contained motor oil, pesticides, antifreeze or toxic fluids.*Plastics should be rinsed, flattened, and placed in the recycle bin with metal and glass food containers.
Newspapers/magazines/catalogues/junk mail/phone books/soft cover books - place in brown paper bags (or a separate recycle bin).
Place paper bags on top of recycle bin/pails. Shredded paper can also be recycled, please place it in a paper bag.
Paper milk/juice cartons and Juice boxes - Remove straws and caps, rinse, and flatten. Place in recycle bin/pails with metal and glass food containers. Corrugated cardboard - flatten, cut to 3' x 3' maximum, place on top of recycling bins/pails under newspapers or on edge between recycling buckets. Do not tie or tape. (Please do not use boxes for holding trash.)
For more details about what’s acceptable to recycle, please see these links:
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
City Councilor Ken Cockayne said he certainly wasn’t thinking about recycling mandates when he winged an empty honey bottle in his garbage.
And city Councilor Mike Rimcoski said he, too, threw junk mail into his trash can. An aerosal can found its way into the barrel as well, but the councilor pinned the blame for that on his wife.
All of them fessed up after a Hartford television station dug through their rubbish barrels recently – perhaps violating a city ordinance in the process – and confronted them for a story that will apparently air next week.
"I apologize for putting junk mail in my trash," said Nicastro, a Democrat who is also a city councilor. "I'll try to do better."
The city-issued trash cans put out at the curb in front of each of the six city councilors’ homes – and Mayor Art Ward’s – were pawed through for evidence that glass, metal, plastic or paper that should have been recycled was instead lumped in with everyday debris.
It appears that all of them violated recycling rules to at least some degree.
"We are human beings," Ward said, and make mistakes.
“I plead guilty,” Rimcoski confessed. He said it was more convenient to throw his junk mail in the trash than put it in the blue recycling bin that gets put out every two weeks.
George Wallace, the assistant public works director, said that city crews routinely tag barrels where recycling is found so that residents will recycle properly in the future.
But, he said, they haven’t checked on political leaders specifically.
“None of our people found it,” Wallace said.
Ward said that everyone in town, including City Hall’s bosses, could do better recycling.
In fact, the city has a pilot program in place that aims to increase dramatically the amount of material that is recycled.
About 900 residents – 2 percent of the city – got large recycling bins that can be emptied by the same kind of one-armed trucks that are used for garbage cans. They were told to throw all of their recyclables in the new barrels.
Wallace said that recycling rates shot up 97 percent in the targeted area, producing so much extra recycling that the regional recycling agency posted its best month ever in January almost solely because of more recycling from that one little area of southeastern Bristol.
Ward and Nicastro said that Bristol’s success with the single stream recycling test probably prompted Channel 61 to dig through its leaders’ garbage to check for violations.
City Councilor Kevin McCauley pointed out that none of the council members or Ward live in the recycling test area.
Public Works Director Walter Veselka said the city’s anti-scavenging ordinance prohibits anyone from rooting around in other peoples’ garbage.
The Press considered checking for recycling violations by municipal leaders earlier this winter, but chose not to do it because of concerns that it could lead to criminal charges. There were also worry about safety and violating peoples' privacy.
Still, it’s unlikely anyone will pursue charges against the station’s personnel, officials said.
Wallace said he hopes the recycling flap will shine a light on the need to recycle.
“A lot of people just don’t quite understand it,” Wallace said.
The city has plenty of incentive to encourage recycling.
It forks over $65.50 per ton to burn trash at the Covanta incinerator in Bristol, but only shells out only $33.50 per ton to have its recyclables processed. In short, it costs about half as much to get rid of recyclables as it does to deal with garbage.
For taxpayers, that means every item recycled saves money. If the whole town recycled at the same rate as the residents of the pilot program area, the annual savings would easily top $100,000.
Still, everyone involved recognizes the system will never be perfect.
Cockayne said that among his violations was throwing out “a small piece of unused tin” that he never thought would be on the recyclable list.
He said that he’s shredded his junk mail for a long time – taking it to the office to run it through the machine – because he worried that if he put it in the trash, private information could wind up in the wrong hands.
Now that his garbage has been raided, Cockayne said, he knows that was a good idea.
Nicastro said that the incident highlights his own efforts to get state legislation enacted that would protect Social Security numbers better. He said the violation of privacy that comes from digging through trash shows how vulnerable everyone is.
Ward said he didn’t know exactly what he did wrong yet. He added, though, that he recycles regularly."Maybe somebody put stuff in our trash," Ward joked.
Here's what recycled in Bristol:
Materials Collected:
Clean glass and metal food containers
Plastics #1 and # 2: (Please check the bottom of the container for the recycle symbol and number)#1 (PET -polyethylene terephthalate) is typically soda, liquor, cooking oil, and other transparent liquid food containers. #2 (HDPE -high density polyethylene) is typically 1 gallon milk jugs, spring water, detergent, and bleach containers. *Except those that contained motor oil, pesticides, antifreeze or toxic fluids.*Plastics should be rinsed, flattened, and placed in the recycle bin with metal and glass food containers.
Newspapers/magazines/catalogues/junk mail/phone books/soft cover books - place in brown paper bags (or a separate recycle bin).
Place paper bags on top of recycle bin/pails. Shredded paper can also be recycled, please place it in a paper bag.
Paper milk/juice cartons and Juice boxes - Remove straws and caps, rinse, and flatten. Place in recycle bin/pails with metal and glass food containers. Corrugated cardboard - flatten, cut to 3' x 3' maximum, place on top of recycling bins/pails under newspapers or on edge between recycling buckets. Do not tie or tape. (Please do not use boxes for holding trash.)
For more details about what’s acceptable to recycle, please see these links:
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
February 12, 2008
Recycling reprobates?
State Rep. Frank Nicastro said tonight that he got caught cheating on municipal recycling rules.
Nicastro said that he got nailed for tossing junk mail in his garbage can that should have been put into his paper recycling bin.
"I apologize for putting junk mail in my trash," said Nicastro, a Democrat who is also a city councilor. "I'll try to do better."
It appears that Channel 61 convinced public works inspectors charged with monitoring recycling compliance to check the trash cans of Mayor Art Ward and the entire council - something that not even Public Works Director Walter Veselka knew anything about until sometime today.
Though I'm not sure, I believe all of them broke some kind of rule.
"We are human beings," Ward said, and make mistakes.
Making a ban pun off Bristol's "pilot program" to put all recycling in a single can -- which it's trying in one portion of town -- city Councilor Craig Minor declared "we're the pirate program" now.
Channel 61 has appointments to talk with Ward, Nicastro and at least some of the rest of the council on Wednesday. The politicians expect to be asked how come they didn't comply with recycling rules.
Nicastro said he suspects Bristol's political leaders were targeted because the city's single stream recycling experiment has attracted attention across the state.
City Councilor Kevin McCauley wanted to know if it's legal to paw through trash that people put at the curb.
Veselka said he thinks that garbage at the curb belongs to the city.
But city Councilor Cliff Block said the tv station apparently rode along with inspectors from the city so its camera crew didn't actually pick up the trash, which is apparently what at least some other councilors were also told.
Minor said his garbage was picked through last week, but some was checked this week, officials said.
"Maybe somebody put stuff in our trash," said Ward, smiling in a way that made it pretty obvious he knew that wasn't what happened.
One thing's for sure: somebody in public works is going to be answering a lot of questions from angry politicians tomorrow.
Meanwhile, the rest of us will be watching Channel 61 to see if it found anything more fun than junk mail in anyone's trash.
Update on Wednesday, 3 p.m. - It turns out that public works crews had nothing to do with checking officials' recycling. The TV station did that on its own, perhaps illegally.
Anyway, read this for the full story.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Nicastro said that he got nailed for tossing junk mail in his garbage can that should have been put into his paper recycling bin.
"I apologize for putting junk mail in my trash," said Nicastro, a Democrat who is also a city councilor. "I'll try to do better."
It appears that Channel 61 convinced public works inspectors charged with monitoring recycling compliance to check the trash cans of Mayor Art Ward and the entire council - something that not even Public Works Director Walter Veselka knew anything about until sometime today.
Though I'm not sure, I believe all of them broke some kind of rule.
"We are human beings," Ward said, and make mistakes.
Making a ban pun off Bristol's "pilot program" to put all recycling in a single can -- which it's trying in one portion of town -- city Councilor Craig Minor declared "we're the pirate program" now.
Channel 61 has appointments to talk with Ward, Nicastro and at least some of the rest of the council on Wednesday. The politicians expect to be asked how come they didn't comply with recycling rules.
Nicastro said he suspects Bristol's political leaders were targeted because the city's single stream recycling experiment has attracted attention across the state.
City Councilor Kevin McCauley wanted to know if it's legal to paw through trash that people put at the curb.
Veselka said he thinks that garbage at the curb belongs to the city.
But city Councilor Cliff Block said the tv station apparently rode along with inspectors from the city so its camera crew didn't actually pick up the trash, which is apparently what at least some other councilors were also told.
Minor said his garbage was picked through last week, but some was checked this week, officials said.
"Maybe somebody put stuff in our trash," said Ward, smiling in a way that made it pretty obvious he knew that wasn't what happened.
One thing's for sure: somebody in public works is going to be answering a lot of questions from angry politicians tomorrow.
Meanwhile, the rest of us will be watching Channel 61 to see if it found anything more fun than junk mail in anyone's trash.
Update on Wednesday, 3 p.m. - It turns out that public works crews had nothing to do with checking officials' recycling. The TV station did that on its own, perhaps illegally.
Anyway, read this for the full story.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
December 21, 2007
Reycling pilot project working well
Recently issued press release from the city's Public Works Department:
The City of Bristol implemented a new recycling pilot program earlier this month. The new pilot is for “single stream” recycling, which allows residents to place all recyclable materials (paper products, plastics, glass and cans) into a large recycle barrel. This makes recycling easier, increases recyclable material capacity, and encourages residents to recycle more. The new barrels are emptied using automated collection trucks.
The area participating in the single stream recycle pilot is in the Redstone Hill Road vicinity. Approximately 900 residences received the new recycle barrels in November. The first collection using this method was on December 11, 2007. The second collection will be on December 26th.
Results from the first collection are impressive. The first collection showed a 129% increase in recycle tonnage as compared to the previous collection in the pilot area using recycle bins and source separation. This also reflects an 98% increase over the average tonnage for the 2006 calendar year. Rubbish volumes also decreased 14% with the first collection.
These results show positive cost savings for the City. Two recycle routes that had been collected manually have been combined into one route that is collected with an automated collection truck. Increased recycling also saves tax-payer dollars, as disposal costs for recycling are almost half the cost of disposal for rubbish.
Public Works would like to thank the residents in the recycle pilot area. Their participation and dedication to recycling has made this pilot successful, and we look forward to continuing this encouraging trend.
If you have any questions, please call the Public Works Department at (860) 584-6125.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
The City of Bristol implemented a new recycling pilot program earlier this month. The new pilot is for “single stream” recycling, which allows residents to place all recyclable materials (paper products, plastics, glass and cans) into a large recycle barrel. This makes recycling easier, increases recyclable material capacity, and encourages residents to recycle more. The new barrels are emptied using automated collection trucks.
The area participating in the single stream recycle pilot is in the Redstone Hill Road vicinity. Approximately 900 residences received the new recycle barrels in November. The first collection using this method was on December 11, 2007. The second collection will be on December 26th.
Results from the first collection are impressive. The first collection showed a 129% increase in recycle tonnage as compared to the previous collection in the pilot area using recycle bins and source separation. This also reflects an 98% increase over the average tonnage for the 2006 calendar year. Rubbish volumes also decreased 14% with the first collection.
These results show positive cost savings for the City. Two recycle routes that had been collected manually have been combined into one route that is collected with an automated collection truck. Increased recycling also saves tax-payer dollars, as disposal costs for recycling are almost half the cost of disposal for rubbish.
Public Works would like to thank the residents in the recycle pilot area. Their participation and dedication to recycling has made this pilot successful, and we look forward to continuing this encouraging trend.
If you have any questions, please call the Public Works Department at (860) 584-6125.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
September 27, 2007
Get rid of your household hazardous wastes!
Press release from the Public Works Department:
The City of Bristol will host a Household Hazardous Waste Collection on October 6, 2007. The Collection will be held at the Bristol Public Works Garage located at 95 Vincent P. Kelly Road (off Route 229) from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM.
This Household Hazardous Waste Collection is free of charge and open to residents of Bristol, Berlin, Burlington, Meriden, New Britain, Plainville and Plymouth. Identification will be required as proof of residency. No waste from businesses will be accepted.
Items to accepted include:
Pesticides and poisons, herbicides and weedkillers, oil-based paint, paint thinners, varnish, household batteries, hobby and photographic chemicals, pool chemicals, household cleaners and disinfectants, antifreeze, waste oil, gasoline, fertilizers and mercury.
Items that can not be accepted include:
Latex paint, tires, propane tanks, computers and electronic equipment, explosives, smoke detectors, medical waste, fire extinguishers, empty containers – and waste from any businesses.
Bristol residents can refer to the City web site at http://www.ci.bristol.ct.us/content/3240/6587/6590/default.aspx
for disposal information about other materials.
If you should have questions or need directions, please feel free to contact Public Works 584-6125.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
The City of Bristol will host a Household Hazardous Waste Collection on October 6, 2007. The Collection will be held at the Bristol Public Works Garage located at 95 Vincent P. Kelly Road (off Route 229) from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM.
This Household Hazardous Waste Collection is free of charge and open to residents of Bristol, Berlin, Burlington, Meriden, New Britain, Plainville and Plymouth. Identification will be required as proof of residency. No waste from businesses will be accepted.
Items to accepted include:
Pesticides and poisons, herbicides and weedkillers, oil-based paint, paint thinners, varnish, household batteries, hobby and photographic chemicals, pool chemicals, household cleaners and disinfectants, antifreeze, waste oil, gasoline, fertilizers and mercury.
Items that can not be accepted include:
Latex paint, tires, propane tanks, computers and electronic equipment, explosives, smoke detectors, medical waste, fire extinguishers, empty containers – and waste from any businesses.
Bristol residents can refer to the City web site at http://www.ci.bristol.ct.us/content/3240/6587/6590/default.aspx
for disposal information about other materials.
If you should have questions or need directions, please feel free to contact Public Works 584-6125.
*******
Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)