A spirited campaign over the Article 31 referendum is healthy for Lexington. Spreading inaccurate information is not. The “No Trash Fees Committee” website (notrashfees.com) makes several claims that are contradicted by the plain text of the ballot question and by the Town’s published facts. Whichever way you plan to vote, you deserve to know what the question actually says.
Here is the full ballot question, from the Town Clerk’s sample ballot:
“Shall the Town vote to approve the action of the representative town meeting whereby it was voted to amend section 90-9 of the General Bylaws to (1) provide for free residential trash disposal up to a threshold level to be set by the Select Board and (2) permit the Select Board to charge reasonable fees for trash disposal in excess of that baseline?”
Now compare that to what the No campaign’s website tells voters.
**Claim: If it passes, the Select Board “will charge residents a ‘tax’ for trash collection.”**
**Fact:** The first clause of the ballot question guarantees free residential trash disposal up to a baseline. Any household whose trash fits in its Town-provided cart gets weekly pickup at no charge — and per the Town’s 2025 audit of more than 1,400 households, that’s most of us: 81% of households put out 48 gallons of trash or less. The second clause *permits* — does not require — reasonable fees, and only for trash *beyond* that free baseline.
**Claim: “Everyone in Lexington will have their trash collection service fundamentally changed, and fees will be imposed.”**
**Fact:** The Town’s own FAQ answers the question “Will I have to pay a trash fee?” with: “The answer is NO for the majority of households.” A fee would apply only to overflow, likely $2–5 for a program bag on an unusually heavy week (Arlington charges $3.00, Woburn $2.00) or roughly $100–200 a year for an optional second cart. By law, such fees can only cover the cost of delivering the service. Recycling, yard waste, and compost pickup remain free and at the Select Board’s June 8 meeting, members stated there would be no limits on recycling volume. “Everyone will pay” is the opposite of what the ballot question and the Town’s published facts say.
**Claim: “Town Meeting voted to impose additional fees on everyday residents for trash collection.”**
**Fact:** Town Meeting imposed no fee on anyone. Town Meeting voted 117–49 to authorize a free-baseline structure and give the Select Board the ability to set reasonable fees for excess trash only.
**Claim: Fees “will hurt seniors, the disabled community, and our low-income neighbors disproportionately.”**
**Fact:** The website presents this harm as certain while omitting what the Town has publicly committed to. The Town’s FAQ describes a financial hardship program and case-by-case medical accommodations, and at the June 8 Select Board meeting, members went further on the record: free overflow bags for residents facing hardship, dignity-preserving accommodations for households with medical waste they cannot reduce, no extra-bin fees for residents with medical or financial need, and outreach through the Aging Commission and Commission on Disability before any plan is drawn.
**Finally, about “no clear plan”:** the No campaign implies the missing details are suspicious. The sequence was deliberate, and it was explained in public session on June 8. The Board spent more than a year gathering community feedback and sought Town Meeting’s authorization *before* committing staff time and resources to a detailed design. The timing is driven by contracts, not conspiracy: the Town’s hauling contract and its disposal contract with the North Andover waste-to-energy facility are both coming up for renewal with costs rising sharply, and the Town must know whether fees are on the table before it negotiates. The details follow the vote precisely so that resident input — surveys, commissions, public meetings — can shape them. Voters can still reasonably disagree about granting authority before the final details exist. That is a fair debate, and it is the actual question on June 16.
But “should the Select Board be allowed to charge for excess trash beyond a free baseline” is a very different question from “will every resident be charged for trash pickup.” The first is what’s on the ballot. The second is what the No campaign’s website claims. Read the sample ballot, the Town’s Article 31 FAQ at lexingtonma.gov, and the Select Board’s June 8 discussion, and vote on what the question actually says.
Jeremy Levitan
Town Meeting Member, Precinct 6
Thanks, Jeremy. I agree, misinformation has no place in any campaign.
However, I’m still a ‘No’.
While the intent may not have been to appear suspicious, the lack of detail invites suspicion.
Sure, there can be a sequence of events, but estimated costs could have been provided. I’m sure there are numbers; how else could you claim that the new plan will save Lexington money in the long run?
Further, additional details should have been determined before the Town Meeting vote. Ex. How does it make sense that a family of 5 with young children in diapers has the same allotment as a retired couple? I’m all for reducing waste, but unless you’re going to wash cloth diapers, I’m using disposable ones.