My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2014 06 03
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2014 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2014 06 03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:35 PM
Creation date
6/18/2014 7:36:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2014 06 03
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 3, 2014 <br />Page 10 of 26 <br />much higher incentive. She stated the organics portion did not meet the threshold of <br />convenience and suggested the Council consider incentives for organics disposal. She <br />felt it should be easy for their disposal, rather than difficult. She suggested the Council <br />look at trade -offs opposed to issuing a new RFP. <br />Alexandra Bradley, 1385 Caledonia Circle, Louisville, CO voiced her concern over <br />residents being required to retain woody debris six months. She felt if were in close <br />proximity of their homes it may cause a fire hazard. She asked where the woody debris <br />would be stored. <br />R.J. Harrington, 457 E. Raintree Street, Louisville, CO addressed the integrity of the <br />process. He stated the five -year contract has a renewal provision and noted Republic <br />was allowed to present new pricing, but Western was not given the same opportunity, <br />which he felt was a flaw in the process. He concurred with Dr. Skumatz on the 80% <br />differential with regards to recycling. He stated there are many residents who would like <br />to be engaged during the process instead of after the fact. He thanked Council for their <br />informed discussion. <br />Paul Crowder, 296 S. Buchanan Circle, Louisville, CO thanked the City Council and <br />staff for the transparent process. He supported Western Disposal. <br />Mark Persichetti, 1402 Taft Place, Louisville, CO stated when he participated in the <br />review process he was disappointed and surprised by Western's 22% increase, but as a <br />resident, he supports Western Disposal. He felt Republic would have a difficult time in <br />providing a satisfactory solution to the handling of the Emerald Ash Borer and it is <br />disappointing Boulder County only has one compost yard. As a private citizen, he would <br />not have a problem paying the 22% increase. He requested Council award a contract <br />to Western Disposal. <br />Randy Woorman, Communities Campaign Manager for Eco- Cycle, 6400 Arapahoe <br />Road, Boulder, CO, explained Eco -Cycle began in 1976 as the first company to offer <br />curb side recycling. Today they are the oldest and largest non - profit organization in <br />recycling, and work around the globe to conserve resources through best zero -waste <br />practices. Eco -Cycle believes Boulder County is the model for sustainability in the state <br />and country. Since 2009, the City of Louisville has been at the forefront. Louisville is a <br />best practices model for recycling and compost services. <br />John Leary, 1116 LaFarge Avenue, Louisville, CO addressed the woody debris issue <br />and stated his 95 year -old neighbor is willing to pay $2.15 extra to keep his woody <br />debris in his 32- gallon compost container. He voiced his concern over the RFP process <br />and felt it created a lot of unnecessary controversy. He noted this is a decision, which <br />has many different decision factors that are weighted differently. They are weighted <br />according to the functions of their values. He stated staff is hired for their technical and <br />management expertise, but not for their values. He felt the process would have been <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.