Point Boro No Vote Likely Trashes Brick Pick-up Plan

A potential deal for Point Borough to hire Brick to pick up trash and recycling is likely trashed, since the borough voted Tuesday night against a measure to borrow money for robo-cans that Brick needs to do the job.

Democrats have said hiring Brick will save about $1.6 million in annual trash and recycling collection costs over a five-year period, while Republicans said the borough shouldn't move any closer to doing business with Brick until they know how much private haulers will charge for the service.

A 3 to 3 partisan Borough Council vote to possibly borrow $840,000 over five years for robo-cans was one vote shy of the four council votes needed for a "super majority" needed to pass a bond ordinance. The $840,000 would also pay for recycling cans and dumpsters and the proposal was for a one-year contract with Brick.

The borough will now have to pick a private trash hauler who does not require its host town to supply robo-cans, which eliminates most of the possible options, said Mayor William Schroeder.

The three Democratic council members, Chris Goss, Chris Leitner and John McHugh Jr., voted yes, with the three Republican members, Antoinette DePaola, Robert Sabosik and Mitch Remig, voting no, after a lengthy debate.

After the meeting, Remig was asked if he simply does not like the idea of Brick picking up borough trash.

"No, I don't," Remig admitted. "I don't think it would be the same level of service we have now. Brick just threatened its residents that they're going to lay off employees if a referendum isn't passed.

"I work for Brick, I'm one of the employees getting a note in my inbox, 'You're going to lose your job,' " Remig said. He said he works as an EMT in Brick, along with working as a special police officer in Manasquan.

He was referring to an April 27 municipal tax referendum asking voters to approve $8.6 million in spending above a state-mandated 2 percent expenditure cap that results in a tax hike of about $441 for the average homeowner.

The referendum was narrowly approved by Brick voters, which means the township will continue to provide all of its current services, including garbage collection, as well as maintain current police staffing levels.

Had the referendum failed, township officials had said they would have had to lay off as many as 172 employees and eliminate public garbage and recycling collection, as well as the jobs of 29 police officers and other township personnel and programs.

Remig said that if Brick lays off employees or makes other changes that impacts its ability to pick up borough trash and recycling sufficiently, then the local service suffers.

Leitner then said, "We don't have any guarantee that wouldn't happen with a private hauler. And with a private hauler or Brick, we would have contractual remedies we could use."

Also after the meeting, Schroeder said the Republican vote handicaps the town's ability to have a larger pool of bidders to choose from.

"What they've done tonight is huge," Schroeder said. "The proposal with Brick is out the window. And now that we can't buy cans, the big companies will realize the small companies can't supply the cans and that will impact the bids. What they've done tonight will have the most negative financial impact on Point Pleasant."

Schroeder said the bond would have been paid off with the savings in trash costs, not from taxes.

Republicans strongly defended their no vote, saying they wanted to first see the bids from private haulers which are due back at 9 a.m. next Tuesday.

"I don't see how waiting until then will make a difference," Sabosik said.

Schroeder said the delay means the borough won't have enough time to go out to bid to buy the cans and have them delivered to all local households by Jan. 1. He and other Democrats stressed that at least some of the private haulers also want to use robo-cans, but not all of them are including them in their bids.

Usually, in the mayor-borough council form of government, the mayor votes only to break a tie. However, the mayor has no power on votes for bond ordinances because they require a "super majority" which means four affirmative council votes.

So Schroeder didn't vote because it wouldn't have made any difference. However, he and his Democratic colleagues made it clear they wanted the ordinance in place.

The ordinance authorizes the borough to borrow $840,000 as the bulk of the anticipated cost of $883,000 to buy approximately 8,100 robo-cans for households in the borough.

Democrats argued that the ordinance did not actually authorize spending any money and, even if passed, would only be used if the borough decides later to either hire Brick or a private hauler who uses trucks compatible with robo-cans, but needs its host towns to provide the cans.

Robo-cans are picked up by automated arms of garbage trucks retrofitted to be compatible with the robo-cans.

The private contractor the borough now uses rear-compacted trucks. The current contract expires on Dec. 31.

At one point in the debate, Schroeder said, "Brick is waiting patiently. If we pass this tonight, Brick will buy three trucks from Rumson that are almost new."

Sabosik asked, "Why is Rumson selling trucks that are almost new?"

After the meeting, Remig was asked why he voted yes on first reading of the bond ordinance at the last meeting, but voted no at this meeting.

"You know what the scariest thing was tonight? The mayor saying if we voted yes tonight, Brick will buy three trucks," Remig said.

When asked about that, Schroeder said, "That's bull_. They told me before the meeting they were all voting no."

Regarding Brick buying trucks, Schroeder said, "What I meant to say is that Brick is anticipating that this be passed because they want to buy the trucks. But it's not a done deal. Brick knows we're entertaining bids from private contractors."

Brick Mayor Stephen Acropolis, reached by telephone Tuesday night, said Brick is buying three trucks from Rumson for $208,000 regardless of whether the borough contracts with Brick.

"The trucks are in great shape, they're a pretty good deal and we would use them as replacement trucks if Point didn't contract with us," Acropolis said.

Regarding why Rumson is selling trucks in great shape, Acropolis said, "I'm not sure, maybe they're getting out of the garbage business. The reason really shouldn't matter to Brick or Point."

As for Remig's comment that Brick's trash pickup service would be a decline in services, Acropolis said, "Gee, that's really funny he said that. If I had his phone number, I'd call him up right now, because that's not what Mitch and Bob told me when I met with them. Mitch never expressed a concern to me that it would be Brick doing it. But if they don't want Brick to do it, that's fine with me."

Acropolis said Remig and Sabosik met with him about a month ago to discuss the potential deal.

"They said the thought the deal was being done for political reasons," Acropolis said. "And they wanted the numbers. But they never said they didn't like the idea of Brick doing it."

During the meeting, Sabosik had said the borough should ask its current contractor, Suburban Disposal, Inc., of Fairfield, to extend its contract for one month to give the borough more time to get a new contract in place or buy cans if that becomes necessary, based on assessing all private bids next week, in comparison to Brick's offer.

Schroeder said after the meeting that the current contractor is not going to want to collect trash during January for the same rate it now charges, which is about $61,330 per month. The annual rate is about $736,000 per year, he said.

"I can't imagine them being kind, when they know we're dumping them, and saying, 'Oh, sure, we'll do it for the same price in January,' " Schroeder said.

Acropolis, in contrast, said this might not be the end of a potential Brick-Borough deal.

He said the current contractor, in fact, may be willing to keep its rate constant in January, to maintain its reputation among municipalities.

If that's the case, and the borough has more time to consider buying robo-cans and possibly hiring Brick, that could be possibly be considered next year, Acropolis said.

Then again, he added, maybe the incoming Democratic council majority in Brick won't want to pick up borough trash, he said.

"I don't know what they'll want," said Acropolis, a Republican. "When governments change, it can make it difficult to do shared services."

Elizabeth-based Meadowbrook Industries, LLC, handles the borough's recycling pickup for about $395,000 per year, municipal officials have said.

The potential Brick deal would not include bulk pick-up and would compel the borough Public Works department to hire two additional employees and may also mean residents have to pay a fee for bulk pick-up, Remig said.

Leitner said it is yet to be determined if there will be a fee for bulk pick-up and, if so, how much it would be.

In a past interview, Leitner said that if the borough hires Brick, it will have the same rights as it would with a private hauler, meaning that if Brick does not live up to the terms of its contract, the borough can sue. If Brick employees call out sick, they have to hire other workers to get the job done or be in breach of contract, he said.

"For years, Brick has wanted to be a regional provider," Leitner said. "So I think they are going to want to show they are really doing well with Point Pleasant. I think we would have great service."

Brick has committed to have trucks only for Point Pleasant, he said.

"There's no difference between having Brick and having a private hauler, except we save $1.6 million and we get shared services credit from the state which makes us eligible for more state aid," he said.

Leitner said the bid specifications sent out to private haulers call for once a week summer collection, rather than the twice weekly collection done now, with the hope that will draw lower bids than what the borough pays now.