The upcoming election on Feb. 11 will ask voters to choose between a three-year contract renewal with Casella and a 30-year contract with Ecomaine.

Some members of the Kennebunk Select Board have endorsed the 30-year agreement with Ecomaine stating it would be cheaper in the long run. This differs from earlier statements from the board that the Ecomaine agreement would be more expensive but more predictable than Casella. In this proposal, Kennebunk would become a part-owner of Ecomaine, along with other towns.

As a part-owner, what are the town’s liabilities and obligations if terms of the agreement are not met or if Ecomaine goes bankrupt? Is there a termination clause that would allow Kennebunk to exit the agreement without penalty? There has been no communication relating to the details of the agreement that I have seen. Maybe I missed it.

Additionally, the cost of transportation of the town’s trash to the Ecomaine facility is an additional fee. The transportation component has not been settled or negotiated yet. So the question becomes, how can this be a cheaper option if we don’t know the full costs yet? This Ecomaine option contains a lot of risk to the town that has not been communicated.

The cost of trash removal with Ecomaine and the transportation of the trash (yet to be negotiated) will be added to our property taxes. We just absorbed a large increase in the town budget and the select board is asking us to open our wallets once again.

I would encourage the town to reject the Ecomaine proposal if for no other reason than there are too many details of this 30-year agreement that aren’t known or understood well enough to make an informed decision. This is not the right way to make a decision of this magnitude.

Kevin King

Kennebunk