►
From YouTube: Organized Residential Waste & Recycling Collection Citizen's Committee Meeting - November 9, 2020
Description
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/100583?handle=6BD43AA18B254D81A5160DE862D947A7
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/100582?handle=7174C9B6775F429494787ABB6C854022
1. Chair Ward Approved the Agenda
2. Recognition of Public Comment
3. New Business
Review of proposer’s responses to questions –
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
Next Steps – ACTION ITEM Recommendation to City Council
Results of Doodle Pool on Set Meeting Date
Information Items
Administrative fee and opt out fee - ACTION ITEM Action Item: determine if fees are reasonable or should be modified Action Item: determine if opt out provisions are reasonable or should be modified A...
5. Adjourn
2. Approval of Minutes
October 26, 2020
2. Call to Order/Roll Call
7. Chairperson's Choice
8. Committee Member's Choice
3. Information
Agenda HTML: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/100583?handle=6BD43AA18B254D81A5160DE862D947A7
Agenda PDF: https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/100582?handle=7174C9B6775F429494787ABB6C854022
B
Great
thank
you
good
evening.
Everybody,
I'm
calling
this
meeting
of
the
organized
residential
waste
and
recycling
committee
meeting
to
order
it's
monday
november,
9th
at
6
003
pm,
I'm
stephen
ward,
chair
of
this
committee.
The
first
order
of
business
is
to
call
roll
lorraine.
Will
you
please
call
the
roll
chair.
C
D
B
B
A
Sure
so
I
did
double
check
with
our
city
clerk's
office
and,
as
of
when
you
dial
in
as
an
attendee,
we
move
them
over
as
a
panelist
if
they
are
part
of
the
committee
or
in
some
cases
like
member
brown,
who
will
only
dial
in
and
I
can
move
her
over
if
I
know
what
phone
number
she's
calling
from
and
it's
my
understanding
that
this
is
not
live,
as
is
the
city
council.
So
we
do
not
move
others
over
because
it's
not
live
if
they
are
just
part
of
the
forum.
A
E
E
A
E
So
really
you
don't
have
to
do
anything
lorraine.
Is
that
correct?
So
if
we
have
a
member
of
the
public
speaking,
we
just
ask
them
at
the
appropriate
time
to
speak
and
they
unmute
and
that's
it.
That's
correct
maria
okay,
okay,
all
right
and
then,
as
far
as
voting
on
motions,
we're
recommending
that
lorraine
take
the
vote,
so
she'll
call
out
each
person's
name.
If,
if
chair
of
ward,
you
want
to
do
like
an
informal
kind
of
thing
with
the
hand
raising,
you
certainly
can,
but
I
think
for
formal
votes.
B
I
don't
have
an
objection
to
that,
generally
speaking,
but
it
seems
kind
of
pointless
with
the
unanimous
vote
to
call
individuals
by
name
which
is
the
last
couple
of
times.
We
had
that
for
the
purposes
of
organization
purposes.
On
the
other
hand,
if
everybody's
raising
their
hand
and
there's
11
members
and
only
two
dissenters,
I
don't
understand
why
we
wouldn't
just
call
their
names,
because
we
call
the
role
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
and
it
would
be
pretty
easy
to
see
who
is
dissenting,
but
I'm
willing
to
cooperate.
B
E
B
B
C
C
C
C
B
C
B
C
G
F
A
B
B
H
H
So
that's
maybe
in
favor
of
waste
management,
also
in
the
cost
section
of
the
thing
I'm
currently
with
republican,
paying
about
30
dollars
a
month.
So
the
idea
of
paying
20
to
24
a
month
would
be
a
savings,
especially
since
republic
is
likely
to
raise
the
rates
again
after
the
first
of
the
year,
and
so
that's
and
let's
say
a
a
nice
savings.
H
Currently
the
trash
companies
also
build
quarterly,
but
not
necessarily
on
the
same
schedule
as
the
city,
so
to
avoid
sticker
shock
or
whatever
for
people
that
are
struggling
to
pay.
All
of
that,
I
like
say
it's
just
a
thought
and
thank
you
for
your
attention
and
allowing
members
of
the
public
to
comment
on
this.
B
B
Some
of
you
may
or
may
not
know
that
I
just
on
a
personal
note,
work
in
elections,
so
the
last
month
has
been
extremely
stressful
for
me,
so
I
was
not
able
to
attend
that
meeting
or
meet
any
of
my
other
city
obligations
that
week,
but
I'm
back
now.
So,
let's
move
on
to
the
new
business.
The
first
item
is
to
discuss
administration,
administrative
fees
and
opt-out
fees.
Maria
you
have
the
floor.
E
E
So
this
is
where
we
left
off
last
meeting,
so
in
the
we
had
estimated
based
on
the
volume
of
trash
that
the
city
collectively
or
the
households
collectively
would
dispose
of,
would
equate
to
about
350
000
per
year.
If
you
recall,
at
the
request
of
two
of
the
proposers
that
I
talked
with
prior
to
issuing
the
rfp,
they
suggested
that
we
take
the
tipping
fee
out
of
the
equation
and
make
it
a
cost
that
would
just
be
transferred
through
from
the
city
to
make
it
apples
to
apples.
E
Now,
that's
something
we
can
certainly
reconsider
if
we
issue
a
new
rfp,
but
that's
the
way
it
was
set.
So
the
350
000
estimate
is
what
it
would
cost.
If
we,
those
all
that
garbage,
was
taken
to
the
waste
management
site
on
union
avenue,
and
so
we
do
get
a
small
percentage
of
that.
I
think
it's
50
cents
per
ton
that
would
come
back
to
the
city
and
in
the
form
of
we
call
that
a
waste
service
fee.
I
believe,
and
the
that
money
goes
into
the
general
fund.
E
E
E
Then
you
add
in
that
admin
fee
of
two
dollars
and
five
cents
again.
These
are
all
monthly
costs.
Then
the
tipping
fee
of
three
dollars
and
twelve
cents
gets
you
to
these
total
prices
here
for
either
again
the
citizen
could
choose
a
32
gallon,
a
64
gallon
or
a
96
gallon
garbage
container,
plus
a
96
gallon
recycling.
E
E
E
Then
you
add
in
again
the
same
admin
fee
and
the
same
tipping
fee
to
get
to
a
total
of
23
71
versus
2406.
So
you
can
see
those
all
now
in
relation
to
each
other.
So
at
the
very
low
end
would
be
waste
management
with
a
32
gallon
container
at
20
and
61
cents,
ranging
up
to
a
high
of
it
looks
like
republic
with
a
96
gallon
service
at
the
pay,
as
you
throw
option
just
under
25.
E
C
E
The
intent
yeah
the
way
that
I
had
said
it
well
again
like
we
had
talked
about
last
time.
Republic
services
still
wants
to
charge
that
they
would
want
to
charge
a
minimum
of
15.80
per
month
per
household
regather
regardless
or
I
guess
they
would
want
to
charge
the
city
1580
per
month,
regardless
of
whether
that
household
use
the
service
or
not,
which
I
think
is
non-negotiable.
E
But
the
opt-out
would
not
have
to
pay
under.
My
scenario
would
not
have
to
pay
any
hauler
costs.
They
would
pay
the
admin
fee,
but
not
the
tipping
fee
because
again
they're
paying
for
their
tipping
fee
through
their
own
service.
They
would
pay
for
the
admin
fee,
I'll
just
jump
back
here,
because
we
would
have
communication
costs
associated
with
that,
as
well
as
potentially
some
of
those
code
enforcement
costs.
E
C
C
C
C
E
Just
perspective
like
exactly
I
want
to
say,
I
mean
it's
significant,
so
I
got
these
numbers
from
hr
and
the
benefits
are
pretty
pretty
up
there.
So
I'll
find
that
in
just
a
little
bit
here,
so
I'll
jump
ahead,
then
to
penalties,
and
so
this
look.
This
is
a
definitely
a
lot
of
words,
but
if
you
recall
this
was
actually
a
table
that
was
in
the
rfp
and
so
just
to
re-educate
yourselves.
So
for
this
first
one,
let's
say:
let's
say
they.
E
E
E
So
just
as
a
reminder,
so
failure
to
clean
up,
collect
or
clean
up
spilled
materials.
I
know
what
the
one
of
the
public
open
houses
we
had
had.
Some
concerns
from
neighbors,
not
only
kind
of
right
in
the
vicinity
of
union
avenue,
but
kind
of
some
of
the
neighborhood
streets
where
materials
would
either
blow
off
of
the
vehicles
or
they
might
spill
fuel
or
or
oil
or
that
sort
of
thing.
So
that
would
cover
all
of
all
of
that
missed
pickups,
so
that
would
be
150
per
household
per
incident.
E
E
So
they're
not
going
to
go
from
area
to
areas.
So
again
we
want
to
limit
the
amount
of
trucks
and
the
amount
of
truck
traffic
in
any
one
area.
So
just
because,
let's
say
they
finish-
tuesday,
they're
not
going
to
start
on
wednesday
or
flip
things
around
without
first
communicating
with
the
public,
nor,
secondly,
getting
the
okay
from
the
city.
So
we
think
that's
a
pretty
big
deal.
I
E
So
I
think
oh,
this
might
have
been
sorry.
It
looks
like
I
might
have
done
two
here,
so
collection
of
recycling
materials.
Let's
say
we
saw
them
putting
recycling
materials
into
the
back
of
a
garbage
truck.
That
would
be
five
thousand
dollars
per
incident,
misrepresentation
of
records
or
reporting,
five
thousand
and
then
failure
to
provide
required
reports,
five
hundred
dollars
per
day
late.
E
E
Are
there
other
ones
that
we
might
want
to
consider
and
then
should
penalties
go
to
citizens
in
some
or
all
of
those
cases?
Some
of
those
might
be
kind
of
tough.
You
know
it's
not
like
the
missed
pickup
could
is
definitely
tied
back
to
a
property,
but
some
of
these-
and
maybe
like
the
customer
issues
but
leaking
fluids,
might
go
into
a
general
kind
of
penalty
reimbursement
to
the
city
that
we
could
use
for
another
purpose
and
then,
finally,
are
opt-out
provisions
reasonable
or
should
they
be
modified?
E
E
B
B
J
Yeah
on
the
penalties,
I
think
I
think
they're
very
strong.
I
think
the
key
here
would
be
communicating
to
residents
and
streamlining
a
method
for
reporting
and
documenting
these
penalties
and
what
is
required
to
be
provided
in
that,
but
I
do
think
these
penalties
are
something
that
you
know
your
average
household
couldn't
get
one
of
these
if
they
were
calling
a
provider
for
a
missed,
pickup,
etc.
J
Maybe
they'd
give
you
a
credit
if
you
fight
with
them,
they
certainly
wouldn't
have
to,
but
I
think
the
ability
to
have
some
teeth
in
this
potential
contract
with
penalties
in
particular
the
recycling
one
I
think
is-
is
very
strong.
There
have
been
reports
of
that
I've
seen
on
nextdoor
of
recycling
being
dumped
into
garbage,
but
if
we
want
to
keep
a
hauler
honest,
I
think
putting
a
financial
penalty
on
that
is
key.
I
just
would
add
that
so
for
the
numbers
of
the
penalties,
I
think
they're
fair.
J
C
Thanks
so
I
I
really
like
the
the
strength
of
the
penalties,
there's
a
couple
things
that
I
think
you
know
I
I've
brought
up
that.
I
I
feel
strongly
that
the
the
status
quo
way
of
someone
having
to
wait
on
a
phone
or
wait
for
a
chat
to
me
is
you
know
if
we're
taking
away
choice
from
citizens
and
doing
this,
we
should
make
it
to
where
citizens
don't
have
to
waste
their
time
waiting
for
someone
on
a
phone
and
having
measurements
around
that
they
should
be
able
to
submit.
C
You
know
if
they
want
to
do
it
that
way.
Fine,
I'm
sure,
there's
some
people
who
choose
that.
But
to
me
that's
enough
that
I
would
wait
a
week
if
I
had
to
make
a
phone
call
and
sit
on
hold.
I
don't
want
to
deal
with
it.
I
want
to
fill
out
a
form
and
submit
it
and
know
that
it's
their
responsibility
to
respond
and
deal
with
it.
C
For
these,
I
I
mean
what
the
breakdown
that
director
d'andrea
said
of
the
only
two
that
really
could
be
passed
through
to
the
citizen
are
miss
pickup
and
customer
service
failure,
and
you
know
I
like
the
idea
that
was
brought
up
by
I'm,
not
sure
who
brought
it
up
last
time,
the
the
concept
of
some
of
the
money
going
to
support
people
who
have
trouble
paying,
but
I
I
think
that
at
least
a
portion
of
it
should
go
to
the
person
who's
impacted
some.
You
know
so
I
suggest
maybe
splitting
it.
C
You
know,
half
of
it
going
to
the
person
impacted
half
of
it
go
into
a
fund
that
is
used
by
you
know
those
who
have
trouble
affording
it
the
the
other
one
that
I
I
strongly
feel
you
know
it's
based
on
the
rfp,
but
I
I
have
you
know
a
lot.
We've
discussed
many
times
that
yard
waste
only
happening
a
couple
times
a
year
or
as
a
extra
that
you
have
to
pay
for.
C
I
I'm
strongly
against,
and
so
you
know,
I
think
it's
important
that
I
I
like
the
idea
of
having
the
yard
waste
be
able
to
be
picked
up
as
a
you
know,
going
to
the
most
appropriate
environmental
place,
but
it
needs
if
that's.
If,
if
you
had
branches
break
or
you
needed
to
deal
with
yard
waste,
you
need
to
be
able
to
put
that
out
with
your
trash.
The
way
you
currently
can
and
have
that
go
wherever
it
goes
with
the
trash.
C
You
know
I
I
I
get
the
environmental
benefit
of
doing
it
the
other
way,
but
it
it's
it's.
It's
not
enough
to
take
away
the
choice
of
people
who
need
to
deal
with
that
on
a
regular
basis
and
shouldn't
have
to
pay
extra
for
that,
but-
and
I
think,
there's
going
to
be
beyond
just
me-
people
not
happy
with
that.
So
the
structure
of
that
one,
I
think,
needs
to
change.
F
Steven,
I
just
wanted
to
double
click
on
what
jeff
was
saying.
I
agree
like
that.
The
funds
should
go
to
the
lower
income
as
well
as
I
guess.
The
biggest
question
was
who
monitors
and
who
enforces.
So
I
don't
know
the
logistics
on
that
like
who
is
it
actually
enforcing
the
the
penalties
and
sending
out
the
bills
again?
Logistically
carson,
I
don't
know
if
we
would
be
able
to
split
that.
F
B
B
If
it
was
up
to
me
it
would
be
47
million
dollars
per
occurrence,
but
I
know
that's
not
reasonable.
The
one
concern
I
have
with
the
question
of
fees
going
directly
to
residents
is
whether
or
not
the
law
of
unintended
consequences
would
show
its
ugly
face
here
and
it
would
incentivize
false
reporting.
B
C
C
I
know
are
going
to
see
this
as
taking
away
choice
and
anything
we
can
do
to
make
this
a
better
deal,
for
them
is
going
to
help
make
citizens
who
are
against
this
whole
concept
be
more
likely
to
be
for
it,
and
you
know
I
I'm
even
pulling
back
my
beef
with
the
opt
out
considering
it's.
You
know
two
dollars,
I
I
you
know.
I've
listened
to
everyone,
you
know
say
the
value,
and
in
that
I
still
feel
like
on
the
opt-out
fee
that
the
reality
is.
C
If
we
go
forward
with
this,
no
one's
going
to
be
able
to
get
alternative
service,
there's
not
going
to
be
a
provider,
that's
willing
to
provide
service
to
random
single
households
here
and
there
throughout
the
city
for
a
better
deal
than
whatever
this
ends
up
being.
If
the
city
moves
forward
with
this,
and
that's
why
that's
the
perspective?
C
I
I
I
accept
that,
but
on
the
on
the
inconvenience
of
you
know
having
the
pickup
missed
and
having
to
deal
with
reporting
that
you
know
I
I
get.
I
I
get
what
chair
ward
said
about
potential
abuse,
but
I
I
think
we
can
do
better
than
nothing
whether
it's
you
know.
I
don't
see
it
needing
to
be
150
and
maybe
something
that's
incentivized
for
people
to
try
and
abuse
it.
C
F
Apologies,
I
do
remember
what
I
was
saying.
My
hope
that
this
is
actually
just
a
stop
gap
in
the
long
game
would
be
that
we
actually
create
our
own
service
like
denver
does,
because
I
don't
think
out
of
anything
that
we
do
here.
There's
no
way
we're
going
to
get
everything
we
want
until
we
have
our
own
service
we're
going
to
be
beholden
to
a
servicer,
so
that
was
it
thanks.
F
K
Yeah
I
wanted
to
chime
in
that.
I
agree
with
what
you
all
were
saying,
that
the
penalties
are
both
strong
and
fair,
and
I
think,
having
the
penalties
in
place
will
actually
be
a
very
key
advantage
for
the
single
hauler
program
as
a
whole
for
the
city
and
another
reason
that
we
should
strongly
consider
pursuing
this
route,
because
whether
or
not
the
penalties
go
to
the
individual
household,
that
was
impacted.
K
As
far
as
the
amount
of
the
administrative
fee,
I
wanted
to
suggest
that
we
talk
about
exempting
low-income
households
from
the
administrative
fee
and
and
then
I
had
two
comments
on
the
conversation
earlier.
One
is
that
the
it
in
the
responses
to
the
rfp
one
or
both
providers
mentioned
that
they
specifically
document.
If
someone
does
not
have
their
trash
out
when
they
go
by,
they
make
a
note
to
say
this
address
did
not
have
trash
out.
K
K
It's
worth
noting
that
in
the
penalty
fee,
there's
a
maximum
of
a
two
minute
hold
on
the
phone,
which
is
very
impressive
and
something
that
individual
citizens
cannot
get
now
so
a
two-minute
hold
is
would
be
awesome.
I
still
think
it
would
be
good
to
add,
like
you
were
saying,
a
a
simple
form
or
a
button.
Push.
B
Marcy
I'll
just
say,
I
still
see
your
hand
raised
if
you
are
able
to
get
your
microphone
unmuted.
You
can
start
talking
anytime
and
I
will
call
on
you,
so
you
don't
have
to
wait
for
me
to
say
your
name
over
and
over
again,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
you
do
have
the
opportunity
to
speak
if
you
can
overcome
whatever
technical
issue
is
occurring
right
now
and
brenda
you're
next,
in
the
order.
D
Yeah
first
I'll
say
to
marcy
marcy:
if
you
look,
if
you're
using
a
laptop
with
a
mouse,
be
sure
to
take
your
mouse
and
drag
it
down
to
the
left
hand
corner
and
your
mute
button
will
pop
up
and
then
there's
a
little
arrow
there
for
a
variety
of
ways
for
you
to
check
your
microphone.
There's
a
test
button.
D
Okay.
So
what
was
I
going
to
say?
Oh
in
regards
to
the
way
in
which
they
will
interact
as
a
customer
service
agent?
There's
nothing
in
the
contract
that
says
that
they
have
to
provide
an
online
kiosk
or
you
know,
press
a
button,
that's
something
we
have
to
put
into
an
rfp
right
now.
It
sounds
like
it's
assumed
that
their
current
call
center
setup
is
is
going
to
be,
as
is
right.
D
D
D
But
anyway,
if
we
did
put
together
an
another
rfp,
we
could
tell
our
prospective
companies
that
we
would
be
willing
to
award
them
a
long-term
contract
if
they
provided
fully
electric
vehicles,
and
that
would
be
a
real
feather
cap
would
be
some
of
the
first
city
in
the
nation
to
do
it.
One
of
the
first
other
other
cities
are
doing
it.
C
Thanks
for
saying
that,
remember,
hubka
and
just
to
add
on
to
that
I'll,
find
the
link
and
send
it
to
chair
wards
to
be
able
to
spread
out
to
you
guys.
But
I
just
read
a
really
interesting
article
about
san
francisco
and
maybe
remember
kawanabe.
I
if
I
remember
right,
you
might
have
lived
there,
but
they
they
have
gotten
really
progressive
and
their
trucks,
pick
up
three
containers
trash
recycling
and
composting
and
weigh
them
all
and
charge
you
less.
F
Yeah,
no,
I
can
talk
to
carson's.
I
I
didn't
live
there.
A
lot
of
our
clients
are
out
there,
but
I
know
what
you're
talking
about
and
I
think
again
it
goes
to
that.
The
city
owns
the
service,
and
so
they
can
be
super
progressive
on
that.
So
I
think
the
end
game
if
we
can
start
funneling
those
funds
to
creating
our
own
service
over
the
next
five
years.
That
would
that
would
definitely
answer.
I
think,
all
of
our
questions.
K
Another
reason
we
might
have
difficulty
with
that
approach
is
the
size
of
our
alleys
versus
the
size
of
the
trucks
that
could
that
could
do
that.
But
if
it
were
possible
I
agree
that
would
be
very
awesome
and
maybe
worth
asking
them
about
and
then
on
the
comment
about
electric
trucks.
I
agree
completely
and
this
state
has
has
had
in
the
past
few
years,
and
I
expect
we
continue
to
have
ongoing
cyclical
grants
that
would
cover
the
incremental
difference
between
a
diesel
truck
or
bus
and
an
electric
version
in
the
past.
K
They'd
offered
those
grants
two
or
three
times
a
year
that
cities
would
apply
for,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
could
keep
our
eye
on
to
see
if
we
could
apply
for
that
or
encourage
the
respondents
to
apply
for
that.
I
don't
know
how
that
would
work
into
either
the
rfp
or
a
contract,
but
it's
worth
some
thinking
about.
E
D
E
E
That
sort
of
thing.
So
we
kind
of
take
a
little
bit
of
a
conservative
approach,
kind
of
on
the
higher
end.
So
some
of
those
benefits
may
come
down
depending
on
what
those
positions
might
opt
for
and
then
the
taxes
are
our
employer,
related
taxes
related
back
to
the
earnings.
So
that's
the
breakdown
for
those
costs.
E
Yep
all
right
and
then
I
think,
the
next
item
we
were
going
to
talk
about
review
of
the
proposer's
responses
to
the
questions,
so
we
had
included
those
there.
The
responses
back
from
both
waste
management
and
republic
and
then
republic
had
provided
sort
of
a
more
expansive
explanation
of
their
why
they
wanted
to
charge.
Basically,
everybody
who's
opting
out
of
the
program
a
fee.
B
D
B
D
C
E
Yes,
I
was
going
to
say
that
for
the
next
item,
but
we
can
talk
about
that
now
because
it
might
help
our
discussion
on
this
item.
So
I
was
able
to
talk
to
the
city
attorney
and
if
we
pro
proceed
with
another
rfp,
which
we
had
that
unanimous
vote,
we
would
need
to
reject
all
of
the
existing
proposals
that
we
received
from
the
two
vendors.
E
I
don't
know
that
there's
much
value
in
continuing
the
discussions
because
with
these
two
providers
at
this
time,
because
we
really
sounds
like
there's
a
lot
of
elements
to
the
rfp
that
we
would
want
to
change
and
flesh
out,
maybe
even
more
so,
and
so
I
think
the
questions
that
we've
received
will
really
help
us
in
that
regard,
knowing
where
they're
coming
from.
But
I
don't
know
if
there's
much
more,
that
we
could
gain
from
continuing
the
discussions
with
them.
But
that's
totally
up
to
you
guys
too.
G
Yeah-
and
this
is
probably
more
more
relevant
to
the
next
point,
but
we're
we're
kind
of
getting
into
it
now
already.
I
did
do
some
financial
analysis
based
on
what
I'm
currently
paying
and
then
just
using
both
proposals
based
on
just
a
three
percent
euro
year-over-year
increase,
except
for
four
percent
for
republic,
which
is
what
they're
requesting
basically,
so
I'm
using
waste
connections
compared
to
waste
management.
The
price
is
basically
exactly
the
same.
G
It's
within
a
dollar
and
republic
is
actually
ninety
dollars,
more
so
from
a
financial
standpoint,
and
that's
so
that's
not
including
the
the
fee.
The
city
would
charge
for
the
administrative
fee,
so
basically
we
would
incur
that
additional
cost
on
top
of
what
we're
already
paying
for
the
service.
Now
I
I
understand,
waste
connections
has
given
certain
people
discounts,
but,
given
that
it
seems
like
republic
has,
has
serious
issues,
including
the
opt-out
fee,
for
for
certain
people
who
are
not
using
the
service.
B
J
E
The
idea
would
be
in
talking
with
the
city
attorney
is
that
that
is
the
decision
of
the
city
council
to
reject
those
bids.
Since
they
came
to
the
city.
What
the
committee
would
provide
is
a
recommendation
to
the
to
the
to
the
council
to
say
I'm
trying
to
find
that
here
here
we
go
I've
typed
out
the
words
a
little
bit.
Can
you
all
see
that?
E
So
it's
that
the
city
council
would
recommend
to
the
city
council.
The
citizens
committee
would
recommend
to
the
city
council
to
one
reject
all
the
of
the
proposals
received
from
providers
for
the
garbage
and
recycling
collection
and
disposal
and
ins,
and
instead
issue
a
new
rfp
for
services,
and
the
committee
would
provide
the
suggestions
for
inclusion
in
the
new
rfp,
so
they
would
have
to
act
on
that.
B
C
C
You
know,
since
china
stopped
taking
our
recycling
and
stuff
like
that,
but
I
think
this
would
come
up
later.
It
doesn't
necessarily
need
to
be
done
now
and
and
then,
in
regard
to
the
dirt.
Well,
I
had
one
more
thing:
the
the
anyway
I'll
think
of
it
the
direction
that
you're
going
makes
total
sense
to
me.
E
I
think
this
is,
I
would
say,
it's
rare,
but
typically
we
also
don't
have
a
citizens
group.
You
know
giving
a
lot
of
comments
either,
so
I
think
it's
very
and
it's
a
very
unique
contract.
So
it's
not
like
a
typical
construction
contract
or
service
contract
that
we
might
provide.
That
does
a
very
specific
thing
for
a
short
period,
and
then
we
end
it.
So
this
is
a
long
term.
C
Yeah,
I
just
remember
the
other
part,
just
kind
of
off
of
what
I
appreciate
what
member
adam
said
in
the
price
comparison
and-
and
I
I
agree-
I
mean
the
the
price
we're
looking
at
it's
it's
not
unreasonable.
I
mean
it's
more
than
I'm
paying
right
now
with
yard
waste
included
every
time,
so
I
feel
like
if
it
but
it,
but
it's
improved
in
that
it's
alley
service
for
both
trash
and
recycling.
C
I
I
think
about,
like
you
know
what
kind
of
objections
are
going
to
come
from
citizens,
and
you
know
some
citizens
are
going
to
look
at
it
like
what
they're
paying,
because
they
signed
up
for
the
waste
services
thing
and
they're
not
doing
recycling
so
they're
going
to
say
their
price
is
16
a
month.
You
know
guaranteed
for
a
couple
years,
so
I
mean
that's
partly
what
we're
competing
with
at
least
to
some
degree.
C
B
C
Yeah,
so
I
I
propose
a
motion
to
recommend
to
city
council
that
we
reject
the
pro
proposals
received
from
the
providers
for
garbage
and
recycling.
You
know,
as
we've
received
them
with
the
goal
of
issuing
a
new
rfp
that
we
would
all
work
on.
You
know,
starting
with
what
was
already
done
and
then
modify
it
to
include
what
we've
all
you
know
come
towards
wanting
to
include
and
potentially
structuring
it
to,
hopefully
get
more
providers
to
participate.
C
You
know,
I
don't
know
that.
I
need
to
reiterate
all
the
things
we've
talked
about
like
potential
different
numbers
of
years
and
potential
different
structures
of
street
versus
alley,
et
cetera,
different
service
levels
and
customer
service
structures,
et
cetera,
but
that
would
I
so
I
propose
that
we,
you
know
I
I
that's
my
motion.
B
C
G
K
H
F
A
A
C
B
E
I'm
sorry
chair
word:
can
I
interrupt
I
wouldn't
mind
since
we,
since
that
motion
passed
is
if
we
could
talk
a
little
bit
about
schedule,
so
I
can
probably
get
that
back
on
the
council's
agenda,
probably
on
december
7th,
so
we
could
use
we
are-
and
this
is
again
up
to
the
committee-
is
how
quickly
you
want
to
do
this,
but
I
think
we
have
some
large
items
to
discuss.
So,
let's
say
I
think,
carson
kind
of
summer
or
vice
chair
green
summarized
some
of
those.
You
know
the
opt
out
program.
E
How
do
we
want
to
structure
that
in
the
new
rfp
alleys
versus
streets
or
both
green
waste?
How
do
we
want
to
handle
that
some
of
those
big
items?
So
I
would
like
to
take
probably
one
or
two
meetings
to
talk
through
that
give
incorporate
that
into
the
document.
Any
other
topics
that
we
might
want
to
consider
send
that
final
document
out
for
everybody's
review,
before
we
put
it
out
on
the
street,
assuming
that
city
council
wants
to
move
forward.
B
J
Sure
my
first
question
was
going
to
be
when
we
do
submit
this
to
council,
and
I
I
assume
director
d'andrea
would
provide
the
reasoning
you
know
we
want
to
get
additional
price
structures
and
we
had
additional
in
talking
about
the
service.
We'd
explained
that
thoroughly
to
council,
I'm
guessing
as
to
the
director's
question.
My
preference
would
be
to
move
forward
quickly,
so
we
can
try
and
discuss
opt-out.
J
B
I
actually
concur
with
that,
so
I
that
would
be
my
plan
as
well
as
to
continue
meeting
on
the
current
schedule
to
discuss
some
of
these
things
we
can
hash
out
and
then,
if
we
go
on
the
december
7th
council
agenda,
they
just
tell
us
to
stop
then
we'll
we'll
stop.
Based
on
that,
I
did
see.
One
other
hand
raised,
looks
like
it's
gone
down
at
this.
E
B
D
I
would
like
to
say
I'm
in
favor
of
continuing.
We
just
need
kind
of
a
broad
outline
if
you
will
of
these
topics,
that
we
want
to
take
up
with
how
we
want
to
put
it
in
the
rfp
but
yeah
it's
going
to
take
us
a
while
to
hash
all
that
out.
So
we
might
as
well
keep
going
and
work
around
the
holidays.
The
best
we
can.
E
No,
I
don't
think,
that's
necessary.
I
think
the
question
is
so
two
weeks
from
now
would
be
november
23rd.
Do
we
want
to
hold
that
meeting?
That
is
the
week
of
thanksgiving?
I
do
have
a
council
agenda
item
that
I'll
have
to
drop
off
for
a
little
bit.
I
always
do
so,
but
we
can
certainly-
or
you
can
lead
that
discussion
and
I
can
follow
up
out
the
time
that
I'm
off
to
talk
or
hear
the
discussion.
B
B
F
K
E
E
J
E
J
K
E
B
B
B
B
E
E
I
B
I
I
E
The
amount
that
we
have
to
pay
to
get
rid
of
of
what
we
collect
in
terms
of
garbage
if
you
collect,
if
we,
they
estimate
ten
000
tons
for
all
of
the
households
in
englewood
and
then
that's
what
we'd
have
to
pay
in
addition
to
dispose
of
those.
So
right
now,
that's
included
in
your
individual
bills
and
we
excluded
that
cost
purposely
in
the
rfp.
E
E
That
goes
directly
to
whoever
owns
the
facility,
so
the
place
on
union
avenue
is
owned
and
managed
by
waste
management,
so
they
would
receive.
All
of
that
then
we
received
because
that
facility
is
within
the
boundaries
of
englewood.
We
charge
them
a
waste
disposal
fee
and
I
forget
now
shoot
I
forget
the
term,
but
then
they
pay
us
50
cents
per
ton
back
because
they're,
using
our
roadway
system
and
our
road
network
to
basically
serve
their
facility
and
then
we
collect
those
fees
and
they
go
into
the
general
fund.
I
And
then
I
just
have
one
more
question
like
some
years
prior
before
we
started
talking
about
one
trash
haulers
inglewood
was
receiving
over
this
amount,
which
I'm
finding
interesting
and
then
on
a
coral
request
asking
about
franchise
and
tip
fees.
It
says
trash
haulers.
This
is
what
the
city
clerk
gave
us.
Trash
haulers
in
inglewood
must
have
a
trash
hauler's
license,
which
is
renewable
annually.
I
E
So,
let's
just
say:
there's
a
company
called
abc
disposal,
so
they
bring
their.
They
pick
up
garbage
from
a
variety
of
sources,
maybe
not
in
englewood,
maybe
in
sheridan
or
lakewood
or
wherever,
and
they
bring
it
to
the
facility,
the
waste
management
facility
at
union.
So
they
pay
a
tipping
fee
to
waste
management
and
then
company
xyz
brings
materials
there.
They
pay
a
tipping
fee
to
waste
management
because
they're
disposing
of
their
materials
there.
E
So
we
have
because
they're
in
they're
picking
up
materials
in
inglewood
they
would
pay
just
their
license
fee,
but
then
we
would
get
that
service
fee
back
from
just
from
waste
management,
but
would
come
from
all
those
different
sources
who
have
paid
through
their
tipping
fees.
So
we
would
only
we
only
get
those
questions
or
that
amount
back
from
the
one
company.
Waste
management
who
owns
the
facility.
I
J
E
Yeah,
so
what
I'm
pulling
up
on
the
screen?
If
you
recall
there
were
a
variety
of
questions
from
the
citizens
committee
and
I
tried
to
summarize
those
all
into
one
document,
and
so
this
was
the
response,
so
just
starting
at
the
top
here.
What
does
the
city
receive
per
ton
by
the
trash
collectors
for
tipping
fees
from
the
oxford
waste
transfer
station?
What
is
the
account
number
in
the
city's
budget?
So
we
receive
50
cents
per
cubic
yard
and
the
account
is
a
waste
transfer
surcharge.
So
that's
really
the
right
term.
E
E
I
E
E
So
if
we
were
go
to,
if
we
were
to
go
to
an
organized
system
where
we
had
one
provider,
they
would
pay
oxford
station
300
we're
estimating
350
000
and
then
we
would
get
the
city
would
get
back
50
cents
per
cubic
yard,
which
I've
not
done
that
math.
But
it's
then
what
would
be
the
assumption
of
what
we
would
get
back
would
be
a
portion
of
this
775.
E
So
I
don't
think
the
number
would
change,
because
we're
still
roughly
I'm
assuming
taking
all
the
garbage
from
englewood
is
going
to
oxford
station.
Maybe
not
maybe
that's
a
big
assumption,
but
just
because
of
the
proximity-
it's
probably
close,
but
so
we
don't
anticipate
this
changing
at
all
or
very
much,
because
if
we
were
to
go
to
a
single
click.
B
B
E
B
I
B
B
Item
number
seven
is
chairperson's
choice.
I'd
just
like
to
reiterate
my
thanks
to
carson
for
covering
for
me.
Last
week
I
had
some
personal
items
to
take
care
of,
so
I
appreciate
that.
That's
all
I
have
so
we'll
go
on
to
number
eight
committee
members
choice
raise
your
hand
if
you
would
like
to
speak
during
this
portion
of
our
time
carson.
You
are
first.
K
J
I'd
just
like
to
say
really
briefly
that
I
think
this
has
been
a
really
productive
meeting
and
I
think
we're
working
really
well
as
a
group
right
now-
and
I
appreciate
both
chairman
ward
and
vice
chair
greene's,
facilitating
the
meetings
I
think
we're
staying
organized
and
on
top
of
it
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
seeing
what
kind
of
good
deal
we
can
get.
Hopefully,.
B
I
B
B
C
I
would
say
in
regard
to
that
is:
if
this
had
just
gone
to
a
ballot,
then
it
probably
would
have
been
written
as
kind
of
simple.
Like
should
inglewood
go
to
single
provider,
and
if
that
passed,
then
none
of
the
nuance
that
we're
going
through
as
this
committee
would
have
been
taken
into
account
and
the
city
would
probably
just
if
they.
B
B
I
K
K
All
of
the,
if,
if
it's
on
a
ballot,
exactly
the
text,
that's
in
the
ballot
is
what
has
to
be
adopted.
It
can't
be
tweaked
or
revised,
and
since
this
is
kind
of
a
new
program
for
the
city,
I
think
it's
important
that
we
have
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
and
city
council
would
have
that
flexibility.
But
if
it
was
on
the
ballot,
it
would
be
set
in
stone
until
another
vote
took
place
on
the
ballot
to
change
the
language.