Laserfiche WebLink
raised, addressing contacting haulers (Attachment A, suggested ideas for the <br />process — Item #4), Mr. Culver suggesting a phone call versus letter or e-mail if <br />the neighborhood felt this may provide more incentive for a hauler to respond; <br />and opined that it may also make a difference depending on the hauler. <br />However, while agreeing it may be prudent to simplify current legalese in the <br />current guide, Mr. Culver expressed concern in how much language to include <br />making sure this remained clear for residents. Mr. Culver reiterated that the City <br />had no skin in this game, and was not accountable, as none of the municipal <br />requirements or restrictions applied to this process. Mr. Culver reiterated that any <br />arrangement made was strictly between the hauler of choice and residents; and <br />they would need to work out their own collective terms, guarantees and how <br />binding it ended up being. Mr. Culver opined that he anticipated it would not be <br />binding on either side under this scenario and as it was initially a pilot program <br />for an interested neighborhood and their hauler of choice to pursue. <br />Member Cihacek suggested negotiations would be done as a group, and therefore <br />spoke in support of removing that language. <br />Member Seigler suggested posting it on the City's website after deleting that <br />specific language. <br />Member Wozniak opined that the point of tonight's discussion was to offer ways <br />to make the process as easy as possible for residents, and that included non- <br />inflammatory language as he had previously offered his preferences and concerns. <br />However, Member Wozniak opined that, if residents actually knew and were <br />concerned with where their garbage ended up, it may negate many of the items <br />addressed in the draft guide. <br />Chair Stenlund noted the need to ensure that residents and haulers are clearly <br />aware that the City is not involved in any way at all; and opined that he thought <br />the interest may be found to be only about choice, and not cost. Chair Stenlund <br />opined that this included not having the City of Roseville tell them which hauler <br />to use. Chair Stenlund asked staff to verify the actual number of licensed haulers <br />in Roseville, opining that it was actually eight haulers. Chair Stenlund spoke in <br />support of the survey idea and language. <br />Chair Stenlund stated that he found the number of pages in the draft guide to be a <br />reasonable number, but opined there may be a lack of clarity on how to change <br />haulers, since it may not be easy depending on the fine print in current individual <br />residential contracts. As an example, Chair Stenlund questioned why he <br />continued to be charged a fuel surcharge; and questioned if changing haulers <br />could be done with a simple phone call, and how long the transfer process may <br />take from one hauler to another. <br />Page 13 of 19 <br />