My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013-06-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2013
>
2013-06-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/20/2013 4:09:52 PM
Creation date
6/20/2013 4:01:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/25/2013
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DRAFT Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, June 17, 2013 <br />Page 17 <br />1 <br />Councilmember McGehee questioned how to evaluate how much of the current <br />2 <br />80% of materials collected was actually recycled and if and how that could <br />3 <br />change with single sort. Councilmember McGehee questioned if forcing revenue <br />4 <br />sharing was the only way to know what happened to the materials. Councilmem- <br />5 <br />her McGehee questioned if any communities were doing dual sort with carts; and <br />6 <br />reiterated her concerns, if the decision was to move to single sort, that the materi- <br />7 <br />als were actually recycled, and didn't simply become glorified garbage. <br />8 <br />9 <br />Member DeBenedet advised that the PWETC had been told by staff that some <br />10 <br />vendors considered the final market for materials as proprietary information. <br />11 <br />Member DeBenedet advised that therefore, the RFP had been drafted that this was <br />12 <br />a requirement of the City of Roseville, and if they were not willing to provide it, <br />13 <br />they would not be considered as a vendor. Member DeBenedet opined that the <br />14 <br />PWETC thought it was a right of the City to be informed of that information. In <br />15 <br />response to Councilmember Willmus questioning if the information was actually <br />16 <br />proprietary, Member DeBenedet opined that the proof would surface in the bid if <br />17 <br />the RFP demands the information. <br />18 <br />19 <br />Mayor Roe refocused the discussion to organized collection; and providing a re- <br />20 <br />sponse to the PWETC. <br />21 <br />22 <br />Councilmember Willmus advised that he was still at the same point he was almost <br />23 <br />one year ago; opining that it largely depended on how such a program was admin- <br />24 <br />istered; and he wasn't sure he was quite there to know how that would happen, <br />25 <br />and remained still up in the air. In response to Councilmember McGehee's sug- <br />26 <br />gestion to provide segments of the community for each vendor, Councilmember <br />27 <br />Willmus opined that such a program would lose one of the key aspects to switch <br />28 <br />to organized collection: economies of scale. Without having one vendor for the <br />29 <br />entire community, Councilmember Willmus opined that it was difficult to put a <br />30 <br />tangible figure on the wear and tear on streets, which he intuitively thought was <br />31 <br />part of the equation. <br />32 <br />33 <br />Member DeBenedet advised that, if the City Council provided a response to the <br />34 <br />PWEC's recommendations outlined in their resolution last year, indicating that <br />35 <br />they were willing to pursue organized waste collection, the PWEC would then re- <br />36 <br />spond to any and all specific issues identified by the City Council. Member <br />37 <br />DeBenedet opined that this would be the best way to proceed, after receiving the <br />38 <br />City Council's feedback, otherwise the PEWTC could really do nothing else until <br />39 <br />the City Council took that step and responded to the PWETC recommendation. <br />40 <br />41 <br />Member DeBenedet opined that if the City dealt with only one contractor, that <br />42 <br />vendor would still send out many trucks and divide the City into routes; whether <br />43 <br />divided by neighborhoods or however, and the PWETC could put a proposal to- <br />44 <br />gether and determine a reasonable way to accomplish it. Member DeBenedet <br />45 <br />cautioned the City Council that the PWETC may not recommend the least expen- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.