2011-12-20_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

how that information was qualified by individual experience, or how residents based that level of satisfaction and if comparable to other service industries, and the need to provide a consistent system of checks and balances and availability of a clear process for resolution if problems are found, including continual monitoring and consequences for inaction. Members noted that there were currently no consequences in the open collection system other than for residents to change vendors; and the practice by some independent vendors to offer cheaper introductory rates for a three (3)year contract, with rates guaranteed for the first two (2)years of the contract, then a significant increase and a penalty applied if the contract was cancelled before the three (3)years was up. Additional discussion included the survey questions, their percentages, and how those percentages totaled out based on the total number of responses; and recognizing that the survey responses indicated that there were a substantial number of citizens concerned with their environment, the destination of their trash, and based on those responses and the studies completed in the past, the majority seemed more supportive of an organized collection system than the vocal minority attending Public Hearings, informational meetings, and other public testimony heard to-date. Chair DeBenedet opined that the overall picture seemed to indicate public opinion supported recommendation to the City Council for pursuing organized collection. Member Felice noted the most important thing to residents was the bottom line price of their hauler; and opined that organized collection would provide for a lower cost and more consistency city-wide. Member Vanderwall noted the variances of the quoted prices requested of and received from independent haulers and their discrepancies with actual billings to Roseville residents. Member Vanderwall opined that all indications were that residents were paying higher costs than those quoted by haulers. Member Felice concurred, noted that her collection cost was higher than those quoted. Chair DeBenedet noted that he frequently did due diligence by contacting his vendors requesting lower rates. Member Vanderwall questioned the business billing practices where residents were charged higher rates if they weren't paying attention, and only those alerting their vendors received any remedy. While recognizing that this may not be applicable to every vendor, if the practice was evident in some instances, there was an obvious need for more accountability. Chair DeBenedet referenced the Table of pros/cons and comparisons (page 47 of the PDF materials), with the only outstanding item in those comparisons was the Page 5 of 17