CC_Minutes_2016_0411 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, April 11, 2016 Page 30 experience and good revenue sharing achieved with Eureka's contract when there was a market available, Mr. Culver opined that it would be interested to see how proposers address that area in the value-added portion of the RFP given today's market for recyclable materials. Aside froin organics, and in recognition of the eight city licensed solid waste haulers Couricilmember Laliberte asked if their programs, if any, could be consid- ered as part of their weekly trash pick-up; and asked if so, could that information be provided to those haulers at some point. Mr. Culver advised that those licensed haulers could be asked those questions, and could be subinitted to the City Council when staff returned with recycling proposals. In proposed language of the RFP (page 20), Councilmember Etten noted language addressing educational tags used by contractors for curbside materials that were unacceptable; and expressed his wholehearted agreement with that language. However, on that saine page, Councilmember Etten noted different language for that same situation for multi-unit dwellings and that education tags would be left "if available" and questioned the difference in language. Mr. Culver advised that was an error, and he would strilce "if available" to make it inandatory as with the first language. On page 28, Section 6.06, related to public education materials and cominunity outreach, Councilmember Etten questioned if there was any way that such out- reach and efforts to encourage participation in recycling could be given assistance through translation for those lower participating cominunities with a language barrier. Councilmember Etten stated that his intent was to help the contractor and residents to accomplish that outreach in targeted parts of the community. Regarding recycling in parks and a one-to-one rollout, Councihnember Etten opined that this was a big deal; and he shared concerns as pointed out by his col- leagues, using the example of 24 new bins in Central Park Lexington as just one case. Councilmeinber Etten questioned if a proliferation of cans was the best practice, or if there should be targeted areas moving forward in more incremental stages. Councilmember Etten noted it could become problematic as well as tak- ing considerable staff time to manage another 139 carts; and while he might con- sider it more cost-effective for city staff to collect and haul to a central location, it would be a big change, and questioned how best to balance those needs and re- sources. Along those same lines, Councilmember McGehee suggested having trash ven- dors pick up recycling in the parks as part of their service. Councilmember