Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Johnson duly noted that request. <br />Member Seigler requested a graph showing trending for phosphorus as well; and <br />Chair Stenlund requested trending in reducing TMDL's. <br />Chair Stenlund thanked Mr. Johnson for his informative annual report. <br />6. Neighborhood Organized Trash Collection Guide <br />Mr. Culver briefly reviewed the history of this request by the City Council at their <br />April 20, 2015 meeting, and directing staff to bring forward a residential trash <br />organization kit/process model for their review and potential adoption. As <br />detailed in the staff report, Mr. Culver advised that staff provided several models <br />and had drafted a Roseville Neighborhood Organized Trash Collection Guide <br />(Attachment A). Mr. Culver advised that several additional minor changes had <br />been made to the draft since distribution of the agenda packet; but noted the intent <br />of the document was simply to provide a factual and simple guide for residential <br />neighborhoods interested in organized trash collection to pursue that initiative. <br />While there were some references in the models used that discussed potential <br />benefits, which were debatable of themselves by many, such as wear and tear of <br />trash vehicles on pavement lifecycles, Mr. Culver stated that, from an engineering <br />perspective, the Roseville Public Works Department could not prove that those <br />had a significant impact on the lifecycle of a street. Mr. Culver opined that staff <br />thought pavement lifecycles had more to do with environmental and climate <br />issues; and therefore, removed any and all opinion items and attempted to only <br />present facts going forward. Mr. Culver also clarified that this was not intended <br />as any type of formal city program, but only intended to serve as a guide to <br />provide citizens a matrix and sample letter they could use to draft their own <br />program and accumulate data and disseminate it to neighbors for their own <br />decisions. Mr. Culver sought feedback and comment from the PWETC, advising <br />that it was staff s intent to present those findings and a revised draft to the City <br />Council at their scheduled joint meeting with the PWETC on June 22, 2015. <br />However, Mr. Culver advised that it was also his preference to provide the draft <br />and feedback to the City Council prior to their meeting, and post the draft on the <br />website if so authorized. <br />At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Culver opined that since this was a <br />residential or neighborhood guide, there was no process required under public <br />procurement laws; and only serves for residents who may choose to shop for these <br />services in the future. <br />Member Cihacek opined that each resident in a specific neighborhood considering <br />this would need to agree and a proposed contract and price would need to be <br />redone by a hauler for each household for pricing even though they were not <br />guaranteed the sale and were providing that information to the public and their <br />Page 11 of 19 <br />