03/03/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

all of these had been incorporated in the recommendation the Council had before them tonight. Councilmember Dauber presented her four alternatives for garbage rates to the Council. She added that she had used the LAGCO spreadsheet as her reference and removed the driveway consideration from her calculations listing all rates at the 100ft rate, then applied the rates in varying structures with each proposal targeting $80,000 as the recoverable amount. This incorporates the costs for recycling, trash days and garbage collection. The Alternatives were as follows: #1 the total bill was divided by the total number of cans imposing the rates equally by can; #2 actual recycling expense plus trash day costs was divided by the number of people in Town and also divided by the number of cans in use with the same results of $11 per can; #3 moved a small percentage of the garbage expense into the amount that all residents would pay and divided the remainder of garbage costs equally among all cans; #4 approximately 25% of the garbage costs was divided equally among the residents with 75% of the cost distributed among the number of cans(Council Sub - Committees proposed rates). Dauber added that her preference was alternative #2. Councilmember Hubbard commented that the Sub -Committee's proposal (#4 ) which he supported was proposed to protect the large families, noting that the number of cans a residence uses already subsidizes the 0 or 1 can family and that the costs to LAGCO to pick up additional cans was considered. Johnson added that as a member of the Sub -Committee he concurred with Hubbard's comments Dauber reported on a small telephone survey she had conducted with residents with large families and the number of cans they use noting that she had received a wide range of responses. She did find, however, that consistently they felt the holidays produced more waste and would appreciate one of the Town clean-up days being scheduled after Christmas. Siegel commented that basically the rates are very similar especially the charges that would affect the majority of residents - the one and two can users. The primary differences were the charges to the 0 can users or baseline rate and he supported the Sub -Committees recommended rates adding that they would now be paying a fairer contribution for the services they receive plus a standby availability for that residence for the whole program. Mayor Tryon invited the public to speak, noting that the Public Hearing on this item was closed but that comments from the public would be appreciated before the Council final vote. March 3,1993 Regular City Council Meeting