CC_Minutes_2003_0818 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

charged $60-72 to use a container for the season. Added to these costs, !would be required to buy special biodegradable paper bags that run roughly $1.25 each. Guessing conservatively, lestimate our yard would require at least 70-80 bags. Those costs don't even begin to account for the additional labor involved in bagging leaves. Obviously, curbside pickup is a much more cost-effective method for us. I would gladly be willing to pay more than the current $10.00 fee for this service. Valuable property: My family is very familiar with Roseville's policy of `valuable property.' My first childhood home in Roseville was taken by eminent domain, and my parent's were forced to sell the back half lot of my second childhood home in order to pay assessments when a cul-de-sac was foisted upon us. In spite of this, our family believed in the city, and most have lived in Roseville the majority of their lives. My husband and I purchased our home just over ten years ago. Over the last sixty-odd years, my grandparents, parents, and siblings have watched all the `valuable land' change-over to homes and strip malls. I personalty believe that ti'ie compost site is serving a valuable service. Equipment storage: You also stated that the leaf pickup and composting equipment takes up valuable space in city buildings. Was I incorrect in understanding that equipment storage was or;e of the argum~~ts, ar-d part of the reason why I voted "Yes," to support the City Hall Complex referendum? Lawsuits: This is another area of interest for me. 1 would seriously be interested in learning more about lawsuits that have involved compost sites similar to Roseville's. I am particularly interested since ! grew up with the Roseville Compost Site out my back door. I always thought it was perfectly situated - on former swampland; separated from housing by the Nature Center and Rehabilitation buildings, the arboretum, soccer fields, woods, roads, ponds and swamp; settled on low land to keep the earthy odors from delicate noses, etc. The proximity of housing to the compost site seems to be very similar to that offered at the county sites in St. Paul and (formerly) Maplewood. Unfortunately, I confess that don't have much sympathy if owners of the town-homes (across from the entrance) have complaints, since the compost site has existed long before the homes were even conceived. Recommendation presented to the Counci6: My understanding is that the City Council instructed the Public Works and Transportation Commission to study the issue of curbside leaf pickup and the compost site. The Commission performed their task, and presented the City Council with a recommendation to not only keep the compost site, but to also expand the curbside leaf pickup program, citing a lower cost per user under the expanded program. If the arguments you presented for eliminating the pickup program and closing the compost site were of significant concern, I would expect that the Commission would heve been tasked by the Council to examine the whole picture, paying particular attention to the special issues of concern. Since the recommendation makes no mention of these other issues, I ask the following: If the Commission did not perform their task as instructed, why didn't the Council reject their proposal and send it back to them for proper completion? If the Council was not aware of these issues until after the proposal was complete, again, why was the proposal not sent back to the Commission for additional study? If the Commission did complete their task as assigned, presented a proposal to the Council, and had it rejected out of hand, why did we bother to seek the Commission's input in the first place? Again, I thank you for your time. I am hoping that the curbside pickup program is continued and expanded, and the compost site has a long time to exist in Roseville. Sincerely, Linda C. Hemp Roseville Resident