1975_0331_CCws_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

biarch 3I , 1975 T0: City Council FROM: .�ames F. Andxe, City Manager��- SUBJECT: 8x2ish ftemoval Pfliicy Attached is a report from the Director of Public Works addressing the alterna�ives for brush removal. As the Cauncil xecalZs at hudget time, apprapriations far brush removal were not included in the final budget. It was discussed at that time the possibility of charging far the receipt and disposal of brush_ If the City is nat to charge for brush t�ere remains basica�2y �wo aZternatives. The first is ta absorb the defa.cit that would occur in the Publi� 6Vorks budget (estimated $12,QQ0). The second, is for the City to Rold the resident responsible for the disposal of his or her brush. It is recagnized that this has been a service provided over the past sevexal years. However, circumstances have changed significantly in terms of land- f�ll dis�osal problems and rapidly increasing costs of hauling and landfill charges. There are nine residential re£use haulers serving Roseville. We were able ta contact 7 of the 9 to detexmi.ne �he�x policy in regaz�d to bxush pickup. Ail but one indicated that �here would not be an extra ch arge �or brush pickup as �.on� as �he brush was a.n reasonably short Tengths and �aundled or bagged. If there was a large amoun� a nomimal charge may be billed. It would appear that most haulers wauld be will�ng, fram a competitzve standpoint, to wor�C an arrangement that wauld cost the resident a nominal charge ar no additiional charge depending upon th.e volume. In any event, the present policy of most haulers would cost the resident less, than if the City received and dispased of brush.