BY ADAM ATKINSONNorth Country This Week

POTSDAM — A split board vote approved new trash rates for the village, but not until after public comments critical of the new trash policy, and a debate later between trustees.

Village residents will soon be able to choose between two different sized, and priced, trash containers under the new residential solid waste program recently approved by the Village Board of Trustees.

The board signed off on the rates for the containers at their meeting Monday, June 15.

However, while the required orange bags are gone, long considered by many residents to be a hassle, some residents are concerned that the new policy will lead to residents throwing away more trash and recycle less. The orange bags were the previous method the village compelled residents to follow its recycling and waste disposing policies.

With the bags gone, at least one trustee feels that some of the control offered to residents over how much household garbage they generate is now gone. Another village official felt that the RFP circulated by the village for a new hauler was so specific that Casella, Inc., the village’s longtime hauler was the only firm that could meet all the specs and that it guaranteed them the new contract.

The board adopted the new trash service rates as part of the village's recently approved five-year contract with Casella Waste Services of Potsdam. The new service was approved to do away with the orange bags while also trying to encourage waste reduction, recycling and composting among residents.

Under the approved rate structure, residential customers will continue to pay a flat rate of $33.95 per month during July and August 2026. Beginning in September, residents will be able to choose between two container sizes.

Customers selecting a 64-gallon trash container will pay $25 per month, or $75 per quarter, while those using a standard 96-gallon container will pay $40 per month, or $120 per quarter. The new rates will remain in effect through June 2027.

Comparing costs between the policy for this past fiscal year and the coming one is a little like comparing apples to oranges, since the recently passed rates do not take into consideration the orange bag cost, and charge for bin sizes instead.

Rates for the 2025-2026 fiscal year are $14.53 per month per household and the orange bags cost $19.50 per roll of 5.

The new system will allow households producing less trash to request a smaller container. Residents who continue using the standard-sized container may also request an additional recycling bin.

The resolution provides for two designated periods each fiscal year during which customers may switch between trash service account types, subject to container availability. Village officials may also establish limits on the number of containers available based on contractual obligations, operational needs, program participation levels and budget considerations.

Not everyone is in favor of the changes. At the village meeting June 15, two residents spoke during public comment and were critical of the new policy.

Susan Powers, a member of the village’s Climate Smart Communities Task Force, spoke specifically about the new fees. While she said the new system with two different sizes of trash receptacles would be more convenient for village residents compared to the orange bag system and that the village service could be cheaper than Casella services offered outside of the village, she said the new fees would not promote sustainable waste disposal.

“We don’t need to lose the strategy that those people who generate more trash should pay more,” Powers said. “‘Pay as you throw’ is one of the only ways to promote the more sustainable approaches of reducing waste generation and appropriately recycling whenever possible.”

Powers said the cost structure should reward those who generate smaller amounts of trash and charge more to those who generate greater amounts of trash.

“I do not believe that the proposed price structure does this,” she said.

Mark V. was also critical of the new trash service contract.

“I really feel it's a disincentive for people who do a lot of work to recycle and compost,” he said. He said he and his wife were diligent about making a clean recycled product, washing all of the recyclables before they go out to the curb and freezing all of the odorous garbage they have in the freezer. “So we therefore produce only one bag of garbage every two weeks. So I’m talking about maybe at the most spending 61 dollars a quarter if I’m being generous and buying extra bags. Now it's going to be 75 dollars. So it's just a small increase and it's maybe not a killer but that on top of a 39 percent increase in my village property taxes. That all starts to feel like a lot.”

Responding to the comments, Village Mayor Alexandra Jacobs Wilke said the new service was publicly bid and Casella was willing to work with the village on certain requests. She pointed out that the flat rate will only be for the first two months and then the differential rates would kick in.

She said she doesn’t believe the village has the ability to levy a higher amount for bigger bins in a rate-based system run by a municipality much higher than the base rate, since the village is technically not supposed to make a profit on such services.

“Just to be transparent, it's a simple math ratio as to how we reached these (rates),” she said.

Wilke said some of the baseline rates was guess work however, and pointed out that this will be a pilot year for the new trash rates and that rates could be adjusted somewhat midyear if they discovered they were “wildly off.”

“We may need to be open as a village to adjusting,” Wilke said.

Trustee Lynne Shulte, a member of the committee charged with developing the Request for Proposal for the new trash service, pointed out that the new contract is different in structure to the new one. She added that the village has also traditionally covered about $6,000 a month in fees charged by Casella in the general fund as well, which is possibly a future discussion for the board she said.

“This is a work in progress,” Schulte said.

Discussion on the new contract and the rates continued at various points throughout the meeting among members of the board.

When it came time for the vote, Trustees Allison Carney and Ryan Deuel both were critical of the rates and the new service and how the formula was arrived at.

“I think this process has been a little flawed from the beginning,” Deuel said. Deuel said the RFP that was put out soliciting trash companies to submit bids read like a contract.

“I think there were very specific elements in that RFP that made it very difficult for bidders to actually meet. So we got the one bid from the one company that could probably handle the village’s trash. I’m not necessarily convinced that we’re saving our village residents money,” Deuel said. He also added that he was not convinced that the price differential for the bin sizes would be enough to incentivize recycling.

Trustee Sharon Williams, also a member of the trash committee, pointed out that the village adopted the new trash service in part to do away with the orange bags.

“I’ve talked to so many people who have said that the rate was one thing but that the hassle of the bags… was quite the hassle,” she said.

“One of my biggest concerns is that the new system removes a level of control that residents had. Under the orange bag system, people could reduce their cost by throwing away less. Bags were inconvenient but they did create an incentive to minimize waste to keep costs down. This new approach takes that option away,” Carney said.

Carney said that she did not feel that she was also provided with clear data to support the new rates.

“I mean it's great that you two came on the board not too long ago and we’ve been working on this a long time,” said Schulte. She said there were committee reports about the trash service that have been circulated among the board members, but that without specifics she did not know what exactly the two trustees wanted to know about the new service.

“You’ve been on the board for three years is that correct?” Carney asked, adding that she has never seen a report or presentation about the new service presented by Schulte in that time.

“I absolutely have no idea what you are talking about, but we started this process last year before you were on the board, of looking at trash,” Schulte said. “This is just a miscommunication point… Apologies, but this was not trying to sneak one over or make decisions that were not looked at as a whole.”

“I personally feel like a lot of the emails back and forth (among board members) were attacking the committee, and it really hurt that it doesn’t seem like Allison or Ryan trust me or anyone else on the committee at all,” Schulte said.

After some additional discussion, the vote was taken with Carney and Deuel voting “no” and Schulte, Williams and Wilke voting “yes.”

Help St. Lawrence County Stay Connected!

We’re glad you read this article reported by the staff of NorthCountryNow.com.

If you haven’t done so already, please consider subscribing to ensure you have full access to all the news and info about St. Lawrence County.

Your subscriptions make it possible for us to provide trustworthy local news, promote our many community events, and encourage community dialogue.

Please click here to subscribe today!