2016-10-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

80 would continue, but stated staff expected a slight increase to their cost to provide 81 recycling to parks compared to what was previously shown to the PWETC and City 82 Council. Mr. Culver advised that those actual and final costs would be available to 83 the City Council before they approved the final contract after negotiations. Mr. 84 Culver noted staff would continue to strongly advocate for walk-up service to park 85 buildings and parking lot service; and then continue to work with the Parks & 86 Recreation staff and commission to determine how best to begin that experimental 87 or pilot program with carts and their locations. Mr. Culver noted this may or may 88 not involve modifying how they were initially planned with the contractor. 89 90 Member Wozniak recalled when bids were first discussed by the PWETC, there 91 appeared to be some apprehension from Par s & Recreation Department staff in 92 gathering containers at a central collectio int, asking if they were now more 93 open to that process. 94 95 Mr. Culver reported that wasn't n sarily the situation, but reiterated those were 96 ongoing discussions given changes d cost differences realized at this point in the 97 negotiations. Mr. Culver advised that ultimately it would be a recommendation by 98 Parks & Recreation staff d advisory commission, and decision-making by the 99 City Council as to the i e of recycling in parks. 100 101 In response to Member W zniak s review of A Ramsey County practice of co - 102 locating trash and recycling containers, Mr. Culver advised that the city currently 103 didn't have staff or resources to empty both types of containers due to the need to 104 keep bags separated by whether garbage or recycling materials; but deferred more 105 detailed comment to the Parks & Recreation Department. 106 IN VP 107 Member Wozniak opined that the difference between $3 and $10 per pull could 108 purchase a truck or more staff for the city. 109 110 Mr. Culver responded that this was all part of ongoing discussions with the Parks 111 & Recreation Department as experiments were initiated to expand recycling in city 112 parks. 113 114 On another note, while he wasn't overly familiar with new city park buildings, 115 Member Wozniak notA he understood they were very nice. However, referencing 116 comments from Jean Buckley, Member Wozniak reported that at least one of the 117 new buildings didn't have any recycling containers; and from the perspective of the 118 PWETC, this caused him concern. 119 120 Mr. Culver agreed that the parks buildings were absolutely beautiful; and offered 121 to refer those environmental concerns of the PWETC to the Parks & Recreation 122 Department and suggested the PWETC consider a formal recommendation to pass 123 on to them regarding their feelings. Mr. Culver reported that he was at one park 124 facility earlier this year, and it did not have a recycling container, but noted he was 125 unsure if that was still the same situation today. Once the city began offering walk - Page 3 of 14