by Chris Jones ·
Friday, March 27, 2026
For the first time in seven years, the Select Board is considering raising both the Transfer Station annual sticker fee and the price of bags to cover past and future costs associated with the old landfill. The sticker price would increase by $10, from $130 to $140, and individual bags would increase to $2 for a 15-gallon size and $3 for a 30-gallon bag. This change would generate approximately $82,670 in additional revenue.
According to Select Board member Eric Ward, sticker fees satisfy the general operating costs of the station while bag sales pay for the disposal of waste. Eric Ryder, Department of Public Works director, confirmed that, currently, the sticker and bag fees cover both annual operating and waste disposal costs; however, the station presently has a $100,000 deficit.
Test borings conducted in October 2024 revealed that solid waste from the old, closed landfill extended much further than previously thought, impacting the area under the current DPW facility and the Transfer Station. This discovery put the construction of a new DPW building on hold and serves as the reason to raise revenue. “We have environmental costs with the Transfer Station and the existing landfill, and we may need to recap the landfill and relocate the station,” Ryder said.
Capping involves placing a cover over contaminated material such as landfill waste or contaminated soil. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says caps reduce the amount of rainwater or snowmelt seeping through the material below, which could carry contaminants into groundwater. Caps can prevent erosion, prevent the wind from spreading contamination, prevent stormwater runoff from distributing contaminated materials, and even control the release of harmful gases.
The hiring of environmental consultants and subsequent testing is the reason for the $100,000 deficit. When asked if the deficit should be included in operational costs, Ryder said, “Environmental costs are operational costs. If you have costs associated with the landfill at the Transfer Station, then I view that as an operational cost of the station. … I’m managing the operations, and I’m managing the budget, so that’s how I look at it.”
But Ward isn’t sure the deficit and future costs associated with the landfill should fall on the backs of residents who use the Transfer Station: “Capping the old landfill is going to be a significant cost, and are we viewing that as part of operating the Transfer Station? I’m not sold on that piece of it. The landfill happened in the 1980s … essentially, it’s a DPW cost. … This should be a town responsibility, not a Transfer Station responsibility.”
At the March 17 Select Board meeting, Select Board member Ahmet Corapcioglu wondered if there weren’t two separate issues at hand: first, the environmental issues created years ago, and second, the operation of the Transfer Station. Should these costs be treated separately or together?
For Ryder, that’s something the board has to decide. Former Town Administrator Dan Nason asked him to look into raising station revenue, and that’s what he did. Now, he’s just “seeking direction on whether to move forward with a proposed fee adjustment.”
Regardless, Ward suggested that a decision about raising revenue needs to be made soon as Transfer Station stickers go on sale in June.