I write in support of the Yes for Fiscal Responsibility Initiative to preserve Article 31, which amended the Town Bylaws and enabled the Select Board to develop a fee-based incentive structure for overflow waste. This effort will save the Town money (potentially millions annually) while simultaneously helping reduce waste. The Article passed with 70% of the Town Meeting vote and should stand. 

Our bylaws should provide flexibility to enable the Town to utilize a range of waste disposal strategies that other towns are already implementing. Article 31 gave the Town more tools in its toolbox for the management and oversight of municipal waste. Article 31 does not mandate immediate changes to our programs, it simply allows the Select Board to implement a wider range of approaches. 

Across the Commonwealth, serious discussions are happening regarding how municipalities can reduce waste as hauling costs rise exponentially and environmental harms worsen. Landfills in the Commonwealth are rapidly filling, with many scheduled to close imminently. Incineration and landfilling continue to pollute our air, water, and soil, with facilities most often sited in communities already overburdened by environmental harms. As waste is shipped farther, this compounds the cost, environmental damage, and carbon emissions of hauling. The only logical solution is to find meaningful ways to reduce waste and recycle more. 

The 2021 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s Solid Waste Master Plan identifies Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) programs as critical tools for residential waste reduction: 

● “153 Massachusetts municipalities, (nearly 30 percent of the state’s population), have PAYT programs in place. 

● Average per-household trash generation rates are as much as 40 percent lower in municipalities with PAYT than non-PAYT communities. 

● If all of Massachusetts municipalities adopted PAYT, that would reduce trash disposal by more than 400,000 tons annually.” (p.22) 

Lexington’s full waste reduction program is still under development and will continue to evolve following additional community input. However, we know unequivocally that we must improve our procedures in order to meet our waste reduction goals and address the broader waste crisis. Implementing reasonable fees for overflow waste is a well-tested strategy. A “Yes” vote will allow us to have a thoughtful community conversation about how we can adapt our waste disposal systems to be fiscally and environmentally responsible. 

I urge you to join me in voting “Yes” to give the Select Board the tools they need to make good policy.

Michelle Ciccolo

Leave a comment

All commenters must be registered and logged in with a verified email address. To register for an account visit the registration page for our site. If you already have an account, you can login here or by clicking "My Account" on the upper right hand corner of any page on the site, right above the search icon.

Commenters must use their real first and last name and a real email address.
We do not allow profanity, racism, or misinformation.
We expect civility and good-faith engagement.

We cannot always fact check every comment, verify every name, or debate the finer points of what constitutes civility. We reserve the right to remove any comment we deem inappropriate, and we ask for your patience and understanding if something slips through that may violate our terms.

We are open to a wide range of opinions and perspectives. Criticism and debate are fundamental to community – but so is respect and honesty. Thank you.