2013-06-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

DRAFT Regular City Council Meeting Monday, June 17, 2013 Page 18 1 sive vendor, depending on their qualifications and the information in their pro - 2 posal. However, Member DeBenedet further opined that it was not the role of 3 government to protect every small business in the state, using as a reference the 4 little mom and pop grocery and hardware stores that had not survived; suggesting 5 that it was just the way things were in the business community. 6 7 Councilmember Laliberte noted that while she had not been on the City Council 8 when this was initiated, she had heard citizen opinions in her campaigning. From 9 her personal perspective, Councilmember Laliberte opined that this was not a high 10 priority; however, she would provide a list of things she'd want to know from the 11 PWETC before making a decision. Councilmember Laliberte advised hat her 12 goal would not be to protect business as much as to protect the choice of home - 13 owners. In hearing both sides of the issue during her campaigning, Councilmem- 14 her Laliberte noted that some were in favor or organized hauling, mostly based on 15 the perceived wear and tear to streets, but she had also heard from more home - 16 owners who preferred the current status quo, and liked the option of changing 17 vendors if they weren't receiving good services from their current vendor. If or- 18 ganized collection is proposed, Councilmember Laliberte noted that this then 19 eliminated that choice for homeowners. Councilmember Laliberte opined that she 20 was not convinced that the information on wear and tear on roads was conclusive 21 enough for her, given the other large vehicle traffic through town, including the 22 City's own snow plows and equipment. In the interim, Councilmember Laliberte 23 challenged individual Councilmembers to talk to their neighbors to determine if 24 they could coordinate vendors themselves to reduce traffic on their streets. 25 26 Councilmember Etten stated that he was in agreement with the majority of things 27 he'd heard tonight. Councilmember Etten opined that it made sense to divide the 28 City as indicated by Member DeBenedet; however, he thought the concept that a 29 garbage can size should be mandated seemed unfounded, while the ability to pick 30 any size container and still provide standards of service with City oversight 31 through a contract was feasible to ensure there was no reduction in service. Re- 32 garding the problem of residents with lack of notice for increases in collection 33 fees from current vendors, Councilmember Etten opined came back to whether or 34 not it was a public utility similar to that consideration for recycling services, 35 which he thought was comparable. Councilmember Etten opined that the concern 36 for not running out some of the City's current haulers would not be accomplished 37 by handing out sections of the community to certain vendors, and would indeed 38 lose the economy of costs being sought. 39 40 Member Felice noted that the City had the ability to write the contract allowing 41 residents to change the size of their container; and accommodate other situations, 42 such as when people moved out and left considerable material for the neat person 43 to take care of. Member Felice opined that this would take care of some of those 44 concerns. 45