Rob Stalford messed up.

Stalford is superintendent of Lewiston’s solid waste operations. In April, he arranged for a subsidiary of Casella Waste Systems, FCR Goodman, to bring recyclables from other communities for sorting at the city’s transfer station.

Along with this, a trial program in Lewiston was started for residents to bring a wider variety of recyclables to the facility. The goal was to expand recycling opportunities for this city and, by extension, communities elsewhere.

There should be no argument with these ends. The means of how this agreement was struck, somewhat in secrecy, are objectionable. Stalford failed to heed the political concerns in Lewiston surrounding dealings with Casella.

His actions were revealed in e-mails that have surfaced among him, Casella officials and officials with other local government organizations and municipalities. Lewiston City Administrator Jim Bennett has since canceled the trial.

While Stalford erred by ignoring political ramifications, there was value in his efforts. Lewiston should increase its recycling as a community, and developing operations that make the city a recycling hub for others is worthwhile.

The goal of solid waste management, in this place and at this time, should be reducing the municipal waste stream as much as possible. Every item that’s landfilled carries a cost, either in currency, time or environmental damage. There are better options out there for disposal; strong recycling programs are chief among them.

Initiatives for expanding recycling and increasing the tonnage of recyclables should be considered important public policy anywhere. For this city in particular, carving a position as a regional recycling center – which spurs increased recycling in other communities – could also be a possible revenue source for transfer station operations.

The defunct recycling trial in Lewiston had many upsides. In other words, it’s lone, yet important, drawback was its political insensitivity. Given uproar over the scuttled landfill agreement with Casella, this is understandable, yet any similar outrage has not occurred regarding the recycling trial.

Its aims, then, seem worth pursuing. Because the trial started errantly isn’t enough to allow pure political concerns to outweigh practical advancements in local and regional recycling.

Lewiston should re-consider the trial’s cancellation.