12/18/1990 - Packet AGENDA
UTILITY & FRANCHISE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1990 - 7:00 PM
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
13125 SW HALL BLVD.
TIGARD, OR
1. CALL TO ORDER
2 . ROLL CALL: McREYNOLDS BARRETT SULLIVAN
IRWIN JACOBS WOGEN
VACANCY
3 . Approve Minutes
4. Construction Site Cleanup
• Howard Washburn, Construction Cleanup, Inc.
• Representative from Oregon Home Builders Association.
5. Residential Hazardous Waste Collection Report
• Tom Miller, Miller's Sanitary Service
6. Solid Waste Ordinance Work Session
• Discussion of hauler's proposed language
7. Other business
8. Date for next meeting
9. Adjournment
TO ENSURE A QUORUM TO CONDUCT BUSINESS, PLEASE CALL LIZ NEWTON AT
639-4171, EXTENSION 308 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND.
h:login\debbie\ut&f-a
%Wool �rrr►
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Utility & Franchise Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin Q�
DATE: December 12, /1_990
SUBJECT: Agenda Item # 4 - CONSTRUCTION SITE CLEAN-UP
Over the last couple of years, this issue has been dealt with by
Lake Oswego, Tualatin, and Beaverton. They currently require solid
waste (including construction debris) to be hauled by franchised
haulers. However, I understand that this issue is being discussed
by the Washington County Wasteshed Waste Reduction Technical
Committee at this time.
In talking with Bill Martin, Washington County's Recycling
Coordinator, it appears that cities County-wide are considering
franchising construction site cleanup haulers to help finance
recycling and waste reduction mandates from Metro. This is
proposed to be included in Year 2 of the Waste Reduction Plan. A
draft of the Year 2 goals should be available for cities to review
County-wide in March.
Since I now serve as Tigard's representative on the Technical
Committee, I will keep you updated on this issue as more
information is available.
I have enclosed background material from earlier U&F Committee
meeting packets that deal with construction debris hauling.
Attached are:
o A memorandum from the City Attorney's office discussing the
construction cleanup issue dated 5/3/90; and
o An excerpt from the 9/90 U&F Committee minutes dealing with
third party haulers.
le/ms
O DONNELL, RAMIS, ELLIOTT&CREW
JEFF H.BACHRACH ATTORNEYS AT LAW CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE
CHARLES E.CORRIGAN* BALLOW&WRIGHT BUILDING 181 N.Grant,Suite 202
STEPHEN F.CREW 1727 N.W.Hoyt Street Canby,Oregon 97013
KENNETH M.ELLIOTT Portland,Oregon 97209 (503)266-1149
KENNETH H.FOX (503)2224402
PHILLIP E.GRILLO FAX(503)243-2944 GARY M.GEORGEFF*
REESE P.HASTINGS ROBERTJ.McGAUGHEY*
WILLIAM A.MONAHAN PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE
Special Counsel
MARK P.O'DONNELL
DENNIS M.PATERSON 111
TIMOTHY V.RAMIS ~'
SHEILA C.RIDGWAY* 3
WILLIAM J.STALNAKER '`v
if ( / } F
*Also Admitted to Prxtice { �S
MEMORANDUM ,�,��
in State of Washington SSiit1
DATE: May 3, 1990
TO: Pat Riley, City Manager
Gerry McReynolds, Chairman of Utilities & Franchise
Committee
Coy Humphrey, Code Enforcement Officer
FROM: Phillip E. Grillo, City Attorney's Office
RE: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues
------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND
This matter has previously come to the attention of Coy Humphrey,
Tigard Code Enforcement Officer, from nonfranchised individuals
wishing to haul solid waste from construction sites. The city's
initial position was that the city's garbage franchise ordinance
did not allow non-franchise parties to haul solid waste from
construction sites. A construction cleanup firm was subsequently
cited for hauling construction waste in violation of the ordinance.
Later, in February and again in March, 1990, this issue came before
the Utility and Franchise Committee. Enforcement of the previously
mentioned complaint was delayed until various parties could present
their interpretations of the ordinance to the city for further
consideration. On March 16, 1990, Charles Hales of the
Metropolitan Homebuilders Association submitted materials to the
city. On April 23, 1990, Mary Ellen Page of Kell, Alterman &
Runstein submitted materials to the city on behalf of the
franchised haulers. This opinion considers the arguments made by
these parties, the intent and language of the current ordinance,
and the realities of a construction process.
APPLICABLE CODE PROVISIONS
Section 11.04.040 grants exclusive franchises to various haulers
in order to provide solid waste service within certain areas of
the city. Subsection 11.04.040(d) (6) sets out the exception to the
Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager
Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues
May 3 , 1990
Page 2
franchise ordinance which applies here. That section provides that
nothing in the franchise shall:
"Prohibit a contractor employed to demolish, construct,
or remodel a building or structure, including but not
limited to land clearing operations and construction
waste, from hauling waste created in connection with such
employment in equipment awned by the contractor and
operated by contractor's employees;"
It is also relevant to note that Section 11.04 .020(a) sets out
various policy statements as a general guide for interpreting the
purposes of the ordinance.
ISSUE
Does Section 11. 04. 040(d) (6) prevent non-franchised cleanup
companies from hauling construction related waste from building
sites within the city?
ANSWER
Yes, unless the cleanup company can demonstrate to the city that:
1. The company is a "contractor" within the meaning of ORS
Chapter 701;
2. The "contractor" is more than a mere hauler of
construction waste. There must be a reasonable
connection between the hauler's services and some aspect
of either the demolition, construction or remodeling of
a building or a land-clearing operation;
3 . The "contractor" hauls construction waste in equipment
owned by that contractor and operated by that
contractor's employees.
DISCUSSION
The so-called "construction waste exception" lends itself to a
variety of interpretations. On one hand, the exception can be read
in a restrictive manner that only permits individual contractors
to cleanup the waste they themselves have generated. For instance,
framing contractors would be permitted to cleanup framing debris,
plumbing contractors would cleanup plumbing debris, and so on. On
the other hand, the ordinance can be read broadly to allow anyone
Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager
Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues
May 3, 1990
Page 3
who might pass muster as a "contractor" to come onto a construction
site, cleanup the construction debris, and haul it away.
This opinion attempts to identify the rights and interests of the
various parties involved, to give effect to the entire ordinance,
and to acknowledge the realities of modern construction practices.
The franchise haulers have a right under the ordinance to a stable
rate base. The public has a right to reasonable rates and
consistent service. The building contractor and other businesses
have a right to pursue opportunities to innovate and add value to
their property within the confines of applicable law.
The reality of the construction process is that it does not
generate debris in discrete batches. Rather, the construction
process is characterized by a series of overlapping operations,
usually carried on by a number of subcontractors. The debris they
generate becomes mixed over time. It makes very little economic
or practical sense to require each subcontractor to sort through
the debris and to only dispose of their own material. In fact, if
this were the case, this exception would be impractical. If the
"construction waste exception" is to have any practical meaning
under the ordinance, it must allow a subcontractor to gather the
debris on the site, cleanup the property, and dispose of the
material using that contractor's equipment and employees. This
scenario is different than merely allowing a subcontractor to pick
up debris and haul it away. The former recognizes the reality of
the construction process and carries out the intent of the
ordinance, while the latter conflicts with the purpose of the
ordinance.
The exception found at Section 11.04. 040(d) (6) contains three
distinct clauses. I have separated those clauses into three
criteria described below. In order for a cleanup company to pass
muster under the "construction debris exception" :
1. The company must be a "contractor" within the meaning of
ORS Chapter 701.
The code itself does not define the term "contractor. "
The dictionary decision does not provide any meaningful
guidance. However, ORS 701.005 (2) provides an
appropriate definition that can be used by the city to
interpret its use of the term "contractor" in this
context:
Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager
Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues
May 3, 1990
Page 4
Contractor"' means a person who undertakes
or offers to undertake or submits a bid to
construct, alter, repair, and to, subtract
from, improve, move, wreck, or demolish, for
another, any building, highway, road,
railroad, excavation or other structure,
project, development or improvement attached
to real estate or to do any part thereof. "
Under this definition, so-called "cleanup companies" who
registered with the Building Board, may be considered
cleanup "contractors" for purposes of this ordinance.
The fact that these contractors are registered and
subject to regulation by the state, helps carry out the
intent of the ordinance, since these contractors are
subject to recourse if they do not perform in a reliable
and workmanlike manner.
Pride Disposal argues, through its counsel, that the
cleanup companies are not employed to demolish,
construct or remodel any building. Although, Pride does
not offer any analysis in support of its conclusion,
their point is well taken. However, the ordinance
itself speaks to this issue in the following clause:
2. The "contractor" must be more than a mere hauler of
construction waste. There must be a reasonable
connection between the hauler's services and some aspect
of either the demolition, construction or remodeling of
a building or a land-clearing operation.
The ordinance does not authorize subcontractors to
merely haul construction debris. In order to qualify
for the franchise exception, a cleanup company must
provide other services related to the construction
process. Examples of such "connections" to the
construction process include but are not limited to:
sweeping and vacuuming the wall cavities, and heating
vents after rough plumbing and electrical work; sweeping
floors, vacuuming carpets and performing a final scrap-
out of the job site; and sweeping the garage, cleaning
the driveway and clearing landscaped areas. To the
extent a cleanup company is engaged in one or more of
the above-mentioned activities, it satisfies the
"connection" requirement in the ordinance.
Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager
Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues
May 3 , 1990
Page 5
3 . The "contractor" must haul construction waste in
equipment owned by that contractor and operated by that
contractor's employees.
This requirement is self explanatory. I interpret the
clause to require a contractor to actually own their own
equipment and have it operated by one or more of their
own employees. A contractor that performs the services
mentioned above may not take advantage of this exception
if he later subcontracts the hauling of this debris to
another independent contractor.
SUMMARY
I have purposely provided you with an opinion that is perhaps more
encompassing than expected. In my opinion, this is the first of
many solid waste issues that the city will be facing in the coming
months. These issues inherently contain both legal and policy
questions. The franchise agreement now in place was adopted in
1979 with minor amendments in 1987. There have been major changes
in the state and federal law which impact the assumptions and
procedures set out in this ordinance.
For example, as of 1983 in Oregon, haulers are required to provide
curbside recycling opportunities. Today, many businesses are
considering the use of innovative recycling techniques and other
solid waste related processes that may not fit within our existing
franchise agreements. A considerable amount of effort went into
the preparation of this ordinance in 1979. However, changing
circumstances and the passage of time may require the city to re-
examine its policies.
I have one additional concern. My awareness of illegal dumping
practices causes me to question whether construction cleanup
companies actually dump their construction debris into authorized
landfills. If these cleanup companies operate on a tight margin,
they may attempt to avoid paying the tipping fee at authorized
landfills by disposing of the debris improperly. The city has a
duty to ensure that these wastes are disposed of in a lawful
manner. In that regard, I recommend that the city consider the
development of a permit system for cleanup contractors that would
ensure that these wastes are disposed of properly. I would be
happy to prepare such an ordinance and resolution establishing
this procedure and setting permit fees if the city is so inclined.
Memorandum to Pat Riley, City Manager
Re: Construction Cleanup Contractors/Franchise Issues
May 3, 1990
Page 6
In my opinion, so-called "cleanup companies" cannot haul
construction related waste from the building sites unless they
demonstrate to the city that they can meet the three criteria
described in Section 11.04.040(d) (6) of the Tigard Municipal Code.
A permit process should be established to regulate the disposal
practices of cleanup companies that fall under this exception.
PEG/lf
peg\tigard\cleanup.mel
tt
t 9 Q 0
6. Third party Haulers - Earlier discussion agreed to permit process - larry
brought pictures
Lee: For good reasons - use franchise process - now have someone who
could be dining anywhere - no control over
Phil: Ordinance doesn't prohibit contractors from hauling waste.
Lee: Not arguing about sub-contractors hauling
Phil Problem is in ordinance
Lee: Concerned about a person who is only hauling waste.
Phil: A'Dtast have some connection with construction - gut reaction-
narrow interpretation of ordinance
ran: For years, don't mess with people who generate waste. Could we add
something about "generating waste"
Jerry: We've got a guy who is doing this and was cited by Cloy for it.
Hare builders. Agreeing that the man is like sheet rockers. Can't
interpret ordinance, can only go to court and defend - but need an
interpretation.
Lee: Would rather close loophole than and put in permit process.
Phil: Two loopholes 1) What is contractor; 2) what is hauling incidental
to construction.
Tom: Still bare problem - need to amend ordinance to clarify it.
Phil: Agreed
Tram: Don't think we need a whole new permitting system - have
identified weakness.
Jerry: Should we do permit or plug holes
Eldon, Don, Becka - plug holes
Phil: only real permit - if let contractor dispose of waste need to be
sure that waste is being disposed of properly
Jerry: What else should be taken care of?
Tram: could look and see what we find. Could be part of enforcement
process.
y
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
December 12, 1990
Mr. Nick Vidan, President
Vidan & Sons Construction, Inc.
5914 N.E. 42nd
Portland, OR 97218
Dear Mr. Vidan:
Thank you for your recent letters to Mayor Edwards and me noting
your concerns with regard to the operation of construction
scrapping businesses in the City of Tigard. This, and related
issues, are being evaluated by the Tigard Utility and Franchise
Committee.
We appreciate your taking the time to express your concerns. Your
letter has been forwarded to the Committee's staff liaison. If you
have any questions or need information, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerer ,
trick R 11
ity A inistra or
J,-c-.- Loreen Edin, Liaison to Utilities & Franchise Committee
prc1212
13125 SW Hail Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171
ons
C64110101#0 lee.
5914 N.E. 42nd
Portland, Oregon 97218 284-8533
November 29, 1990
"'70#1 OF TIPIRD
Mr. Pat Reilly, City Administrator
City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: City of Tigard .Solid Waste Management
It has come to our attention that a proposal has been
submitted to the City of Tigard regarding operations of
scrappers in your city. It is our understanding that such
a proposal would literally put scrappers out of business.
We are presently receiving good service from scrappers
who operate in Tigard and related areas. Their service is
dependable and reasonable and we strongly oppose a change
that apparently is needless and would be costly.
May we urge your earnest consideration on behalf of small
businesses, such as the scrappers and builders. Scrappers
are performing satisfactorily and responsibly, and should
be supported in this instance.
Sincerely,
Vi t4SF
S, C.
Nick Vidan, President
NV:r
i an ons
coAff edus Ise.
5914 N.E. 42nd
Portland, Oregon 97218 284-8533
November 29, 1990
rff_i; 3 - 1991)
OF TW
Mayor Gerald Edwards
City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: City of Tigard Solid Waste Management
By copy of letter enclosed, you will note that we have
written to your City Administrator, Mr. Pat Reilly,
regarding a proposal submitted by waste management companies.
As you can see, we are opposed to changing the present
operations of scrappers who are performing good service
reasonably. It appears that a change would be not only
costly but needless as well.
May we urge your serious consideration of all aspects
of this proposal, particularly as it affects small businesses
and subsequent ripple effects.
Siely,
VIDAN S N
Nick Vidan
President
NV:r
encl
November 28, 1990 CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
Ms. Jean Gallagher
15885 SW Oak Meadow Lane
Tigard, Oregon 97224
Re: Local Hazardous Waste Collection
Dear Ms. Gallagher:
The Mayor and City Council have created an advisory group, called
the Utility and Franchise Committee, who deal with issues regarding
solid waste and hazardous waste.
On behalf of the Utility & Franchise Committee, thank you for your
letter, dated November 3rd, which suggested a Tigard-based
household hazardous waste collection emphasis.
The Committee considered your suggestion at their meeting on
11/20/90. At that time they requested one of our local haulers
research the feasibility of conducting this type of collection
locally. A report should be available to the Committee on
December 18, 1990.
Should you wish to attend on 12/18, the meetings are at the Tigard
City Hall at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, and start at 7: 00 PM. In
case you are unable to attend, I will share with you the Committee
findings after that meeting.
If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.
Sin ,
Loreen R. Edin
Administrative Services Manager
lre/ms
c: ility & Franchise Committee
Tom Miller, Miller's Sanitary Service
13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Utility & Franchise Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin
9-e--
DATE: December 12 , 1990
SUBJECT: Agenda Item # 6 - SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE WORKSESSION
Please bring your copies of the 11/28/90 draft of the Haulers,
proposal which was mailed to you at the end of November.
I have also enclosed a hand-written rough draft of information from
surrounding jurisdictions regarding their solid waste franchise
ordinances.
If you would like any other information, please let me know.
le/ms
. �Ut1G7: �as"?� �Y'c�t-�ChtS� �rC��v�o-ince CDYn�a-r�� ov� -
Pera._� waste- '�rcl,,Je5 �cse.
C�� K OF ti' T ro ' Gon yvwcY Cnvi M M
Clu'� I �•7y cPI ��
�ur�a�m q% Lrs• Ue5 JO,7s las,3s
soo/j,, J
�ore5t �rou 3% Si�ev �c�rs USS 1blD.�ll ka - -3
uuY Y- .ouJ1n- uv K`>owr �2s _ c w Ynowv�
42� p% � i1 S r5., _u 2S O. 10 ----- - --.��'7. 0 Free -;+L
t Ci- - --_ - --- - -- -CtV-- - --- - j - - - -_ -9 - - �u� demos
P�
Se1ev r_.— r5 e25 �Io,IS #ho 56
� re
')
Mil t.]0.uKie101h
---- - --- -- --- - --- -._ -F-ico)da..�•-+�_._ —_... .__._-- - - ' - ---- -- --- ------ ---- - ---- `yr d— -->�rar.c�_s�_1'\w,.
h w�56r.GQ
-7
- Soo
I
7.-1�0.1c-�--.__. _3_L.O CYi_mi.Y�S�__-_.-1Q_c.Y'.5..--- -i -__C:1�5_-----.------- *"���OS_-._._ ��W• 3Jr _ _'
f3$CO
' � � sy��/1E6ri�'.o GNl hEcV
qg
W�)SOhv')Ie. 3 yrs. Yes N-$o Jb63.$o - - -
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
TO: Utility & Franchise Committee
FROM: Loreen Edin
DATE: December 12 , 1990
SUBJECT: Timeline - Solid Waste Franchise Ordinance Review
Our current franchise ordinance sets some deadlines for annual
reports and rate reviews. Council and U&F Committee have expressed
interest in hearing the rate structure issues and ordinance rewrite
at the same time since they reference each other. For these
reasons, the timeframe for ordinance review (which includes rate
structure, new rate requests for next year, and the review of the
haulers' annual reports) appears to be the following:
o October, 1990 through March, 1991 - Utility & Franchise
Committee review Haulers' & City's recommendations for ordinance
language and rate structure issues
o January, 1991 - Compactor Ordinance to Council for adoption.
o February - March, 1991 - Joint meeting - U&F Committee & Council
o March 1, 1991 - Haulers file annual report
o 1990 annual report actual figures & split out recycling costs
& revenue between commercial & residential.
o 1990 customer base & service request statistics applied to
haulers ' recently proposed rate structure
o Haulers identify new rate requests, if any (i.e. disposal fee
pass-through)
o March, 1991
o Finance Director review entire annual report
o U&F Committee review rate structure & other new rate requests
from haulers
o April 1, 1991 - City Administrator submits report to Council
o Highlighting Haulers ' annual reports
o Recommendation on proposed rate adjustments, if any
o April - May, 1991 - Council acts upon ordinance, rate structure,
and any newly proposed rates. Newly proposed rates must be
decided no later than 5/31/91 according to the current
ordinance.
Due to the complexity of the issues facing the Committee, you may
want to consider meetings twice a month during January & February.
le/ms
AA 00.1
2 _i0-40
jL
December 5, 1990
Utility & Franchise Committee
CIO City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Members:
On November 29, 1990, we did not receive a regularly scheduled dumpster pick-up.
During the course of three people calling to find out when we could expect a pick-up,
we were eventually told we would have to wait until Monday the 3rd of December,
When I called back to say this was not acceptable, I was ridiculed about not being able
to control kids in my school. The treatment that I received on the phone from an office
staff person at Pride Disposal was rude and definitely not service oriented. This
individual finally said the best they could do was a Saturday pick-up. I communicated
that this was not acceptable because of evening functions in our building on the,part of
the community and that there were already many bags laying on the ground outside of
the dumpster.
I called to share my concerns with Loreen Edin, and to see if anything could be done
to get a pick-up of our dumpster sooner. Loreen was very helpful and and excellent
listener. She managed to get a pick-up of our dumpster later that afternoon. We were
grateful and the only thing left to do (on our part) was to see if we could work
something out with Mike, the owner, to avoid the problem of not getting service in the
future.
At the conclusion of my first phone conversation with Mike I felt as though he also
wanted to avoid problems in the future and I felt satisfied with working out a
compromise. After that conversation, the same office person at Pride took it upon
herself to call and complain to one of my supervisors making several accusations
about me. These accusations were inaccurate.
I believe that making these kinds of inaccurate statements to a persons supervisor with
apparent vindictive intent, is both unprofessional and seriously underminds Pride's
reputation and public relations in the community. (Especially inaccurate ones)
I called back to talk to Mike and was told he was not available. The same office person
was again rude and sarcastic to me. I stated that I would be making an official
complaint, unless an apology would be forthcoming. Again, I was ridiculed.
When Mike returned my call, he was, in my opinion, not given accuarate information
about what had transpired. When I explained that my conversations with this Pride
office staff person, were observed by another adult, he stated that he didn't believe
what I was saying.
I am very upset with Pride Dospsal Co. I believe they have treated me and my staff
unfairly and without common respect, courtesy, and decency. Mike indicated that his
office staff member could do anything she wanted to do; even while at work. I find this
disturbing to know !!!
Pride has been in the past not always very cooperative. We have however,
overlooked this because of how nicely they treated my Parent Club by helping with a
yard debris recycling program. We have had some excellent drivers and some rude
drivers in the past. This last series of events with the treatment we have received is'
very disturbing.
I expect more of agencies contracted to serve the public. 1 do ask for resolution to this
conflict and have communicated in more detail to Loreen Edin in regards to the
specifics.
Thank you for your time, and I would be very happy to attend a meeting or a hearing
involving the future dealings with this company.
Most sincerely,
Mr. Gayle A. Collum
Principal
Charles F. Tigard School
Tigard-Tualatin School District 23i
c. Loreen Edin
City of Tigard
10935 SW Mira Court
Tigard,OR 97223
25 November 1990
I ) -n'7- 90
Wayne Lowry
Community Development Dept.
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mr.Lowry,
Several weeks ago I spoke with you on the phone voicing some
of my concerns about Pride Disposal Company service. Very
belatedly I am writing so the Citizen Advisory Board will be
aware of these concerns .
With the big push for and participation in recycling it
seems appropriate that Pride would be aware that some customers
have a significantly smaller volume of trash to be picked up.
I have talked with them on a number of occasions. It is clear
that less than weekly ( ie: every other week or twice a month)
pick up is not an option. In fact, they said it could not be
done. I happen to have no need for weekly pick up and am quite
sure a significant number of customers could reduce the frequency
of pick ups .
When living in Eugene I was an every-other-week- pick up
customer of Danebo Waste Disposal . I spoke with an office person
at Danebo so I could provide accurate information here. They
have a workable plan developed where a customer can have weekly,
every;'' eek, or monthly pick up. They cited another company that
has pick up on the first and third weeks of the month. Obviously
fees are adjusted downward for this service.
Pride' s curbside recycling is also less than workable. They
insist items be left out in "rigid" containers that are left be-
hind. For those of us who have worked hard to have our residence
look occupied in our absence having empty containers sitting out-
side advertises that no one is home. Therefore, I personally
transport my recycle items to a center in lieu of curbside pick up.
I will appreciate attention of your department and the Citizen
Advisory Board to these questions . Further information about
Danebo' s plan can be obtained from Dave Walters , Operations Mana -
ger at 484-6227 .
Thank you for your consideration and I would be happy to pro
vide further input if requested.
Day phone: 206-690-1829 Sincerely,
Home phone: 503-620-3914
Juanita Muntz
I o-.V4 1 m e-S 1A /& /X1 CIO
It e The T.
• Freeway-
ty
a r a eha ulers a �� connect through a tunnel. I
provements include collects
TIGARD — Local trash haulers would be considered by the City frequency of their garbage pickup. ticipates they will because of an ex- distributor roads to take local
(and city officials have begun talks to Council in either April or May. As it stands now, residents are pected jump this summer in Metro's off the freeway. Cost of Alte
revise a city franchise ordinance `"The last time there were any charged a minimum of one can per dumping fees at area landfills. A is estimated at$49 million.
governing garbage service in the major revisions was in 1978. In week, whether they fill a can or not. Also,the city will look at balanc- Alternative B separates
area. 1986 we updated and made some Because of changes in the makeup ing commercial, industrial and
A new ordinance could mean administrative changes, but those of individual households, Edin said, residential service within haulers' Way and Highway 217 by sl
changes in the way residents handle mostly dealt with the way haulers that may not be the fairest way to boundaries. Residential service is Kruse Way travel lanes with
Y Y way 217.That design uses the
their trash and how they pay for gar- filed their reports. That doesn't charge for garbage service. more costly for haulers to administer ing Highway 217 corridor an
bage servipe. mean we haven't had rate increases, Families usually produce more because it is labor and time inten-
rthboui
Representatives from Schmidt's but most of them are pass-through garbage than a couple or single-per- sive,Edin said. a bridge to route second
Sanitary Service Inc., Miller's increases from Metro,"she said. son household, and revisions would The effort also will look at the traffic to 217. A ssecond
would be added across
Sanitary Service and Pride Disposal Some of the issues the city and allow people to tailor their trash way neighboring cities govern gar- u
Co. began meeting with the city's haulers will look at include rate pickup according to the amount they bage service and the quality of ser- 217 at the intersection of Sou
Utilities and Franchise Committee structure, rate increases, recycling produce and around their recycling vice provided by individual haulers. 72nd Avenue and Hampton
Collector and distributor rocs
in September to discuss changes in service and the distribution of habits. "The haulers would like to see
the current system. haulers'boundaries. "One household may need pickup some uniformity between jurisdic- would be built,but the i
takes out a number of busineusines
The city initiated the talks, said Changes in rate structure could service every week,but another may dons because they serve more than Lake Oswego's Bangy Road
Loreen Edin, Tigard's administra- mean paying for garbage disposal by only need it, perhaps, every two one city.One of the things we'd like of Alternative B is an est
five services manager, to update its the pound instead of a flat per can weeks,"she said. to see is some way to measure ser- $52.8 million.
12-year-old solid waste ordinance. charge. Also, it could mean resi- Edin said haulers have not asked vice—the job performance of each
Any revisions or a new ordinance dents have more flexibility in the for a rate increase, but she an- hauler." The state wants to begii
struction as early as 1993 1
freeway portion of the project
u rre w from l o ca l marsh zona 1phase,s, oll d pr1 bat
Weda'n dsgro
tributor roads, would probab
of branching across the state and A retired Portland architect, and a number of businessmen stood be completed until the late 19
By CHRIS NORRED hiring a paid director. Broome is now married to Althea to lose if the property were 2000,McClure said.
Of the Times "There are wetlands all over Pratt-Broome.He works full-time as protected for wildlife. The project is mostly f
TUALATIN — A decadeago, Oregon that need protection," says unpaid director of the Conservancy. John Vitas, the owner of Plasti- through the federal Int(
a Pratt, the genial town his- Jack Broome, the unpaid director of The Hedges Creek Marsh, just Fab Co., remembers how the issue Freeway Program. The state
Althea
activist, dared the city the Wetlands Conservancy. west of downtown Tualatin,was the divided people. A number of us come up with about 8 percent
torian manager to walk across the field be- The organization has about 220 first freshwater wetland in the state who had property in the area got cost.
hind her house without a air field
hi dues-paying members, mostly in the of Oregon to be protected by law, together to defend ourselves," Vitas But not everyone liked
p p Portland area. Annual dues are $20, Broome says. In that case the says, design.,A Los Angeles repre
boots. or$30(or a family. Oregon attorney general officially Town meetings with 200 people, rive for Farmers Insurance
That field is a marsh, Pratt was
The;group's goal is to increase recognized wetlands as state water- and a serie�„,of heated negodatton� Lako Os�,ve$o, mal .estate 1
saying--save it. membership 10-fold, with members ways. meetingi " tweet`environmen- thought t j4 wa I to go.
From those beginnings, the Broome said. The Hed es Creek Marsh rotes- talists, cit�officials� and ro .
Tualatin-based Wetlands Consery
from ,across Oregon, g P Y. P PAY 4tlo Puanc
c has developed into a dynamic en- With,more members the Conservan- titin created a tremetldot>s controyer� ,owners fgUp.w Finally - _ bui
Y 1� Y c hopes to raise money.and hire a s ,in Tualatin,r bland was agreed on bowtdanes
vironmental organization with goals y Y u'
'd director Broome says. �:� zoned for. industv�lopment, grotected attic Btoome
Paz Y � ..tt,,..
1=XC?0
i 10Splayrwes a assin ra e City ey es ne
vNA SCHMIDT classroom discussions about the so they know what we're going think it lacks an in-depth portrayal play and the disease. through," said Ashlie Hallaux, a of sexual abstinence and emphasizes
f the Times building Students in, ,Barbara Mills junior. condom use among teens. •n
— Students at Tigard English class thought Monday's per- All 26 students in Mills' class Produced by Kaiser Permanente, TIGARD —A new seven-story of
1 gave the stageplay formances fell short in two areas— nodded in agreement when one stu- the play deals with the life of
"A" Monday for its in- parent turnout and viewing by junior dent suggested ninth graders and "Eddie," a popular high school stu- next year to the Lincoln Center coml
tma about AIDS. high students, perhaps younger,students should see dent and athlete. Performed by a structure in the next few weeks.
res through seniors saw "I think they did a good job of the play. . cast of professional actors, the play Lincoln Eight Limited Partnership
hifts at the Deb Fennell portraying student life. I think The play has drawn fire from partner in Trammell Crow Co., has
1 and followed up with parents should be required to see it some parents in the district who Turn to AIDS,Page 2A department for a variance to build th
parking structure on four acres owner
complex.
;hAit s hisideThe site is located between Soud
F!G7arba' ge haulers stake a deal
streets on what is now a parking lot r
taurant.
By MATT BUCKINGHAM Waste Committee's actions Tuesday night as a victory If approved, The Lincoln Building
t. for the county plan. feet of office space to the complex. T
Of the Times �,
It does in f 1'
act dever our plan intact," he said. duplicate the Lincoln Center Five buil
PORTLAND '— A Metropolitan Service District "I'm real glad that the spirit of cooperation was there The area is already zone.! comn
—and I want to keep it there." Murphy, the city's communis dev
committee and Washington County officials struck a azP Y� Y Y
The county plan proposes building a new transfer variances are needed to allow the ro'(
compromise Tuesday night it the dispute over agar- station in Wilsonville and expanding an existing one in The proposed building height,at 9(
�� bage transfer station plan for the county. P Po g g
Forest Grove.Both stations would be privately owned. parking stalls fall outside the current c
,. Metro's Solid Waste Committee rescinded an earlier The Devlin resolution calls for Metro to proceed "There is a 45-foot standard built
resolution,which amended the Washington County plan with technical
If it's Kodak,Charlie Kamerman analysis of the steering committee plan with allowances for up to 75 feet. I
tats it.The Tigard resident collects drawn up by a steering committee of local officials. and then approval by the Metro Council "unless the which is the same height as Lincoln Fi
ything made by the giant camera Steering committee members had objected to the technical analysis warrants modification." That means Three board members of Neighbor
m�y—advertisingposters, amendments by Metro Council Presiding Officer
Tana Collier, charging that the would lead to con- Metro could alter the plan if analysis shows that the 8 have strong objections to the prof
to ogs,signs,"Standup girls,"and Y e g Y proposal would cost too much. terns. Four board members have exl
mo course.....See Page 1 C. strutting of a single giant garbage transfer station in Washington County. In the public hearing,Larrance criticized Collier for city.
si Section B opinion......... 4A spreading"misinformation"that the Washington Coun- Blake said the office building w,
Weds....`kllow people.....Sectbn c The Solid Waste Committee adopted a revised ver-
ty plan would cause garbage rates to go up. growth in the area.
ice Log........9a Religion.........3C slog of the resolution Tuesday night which its author, ..
a Log ........10A Legals......... 14A We have absolutely no information that one system Murphy said his department was N
endar........15A wools......tA_1 Metro Councilor very
Devlin of Tualatin, said is going to cost more than another—public,private or regarding traffic flow and patterns in l
Iuaries....9A,ISA would strike"a ve y delicate balance between the two otherwise,"he said. the county concerning improvement,
News and advertising6840360 sides in the dispute.
- Collier,who favors public ownership of the transfer making a decision.
classified advertising—620-7355 "People can be assured now that there is no one-sta- stations, said Larrance should not have interpreted her "The city will probably require i
circulation-620.9797 tion scenario being proposed by this body,"he said.
• questions about cost-effectiveness as opposition to the ticipation in improvements on Greenb
Vol.
yrighhtt 1MTimesPubfisnrgCo Washington County Commissioner Steve Larrance, county plan.It's not fair to hide the possibility of a rate
who heads up the steering committee,viewed the Solid increase from the public,she said.
-.
Tucson, Ariz., Recycles Phone Books
Tucson Clean&Beautiful Inc.,a Tucson,Ariz.,non-
profit affiliate of the national Keep America Beautiful
program,reached out to local businesses,government
officials and residents to put together a successful drive
to collect approximately one million phone books.
The program expects to collect 500 tons of phone
books this year and save 1,650 cubic yards of landfill,
8,500 trees and$6,000 by not dumping the old books at
landfills. Instead,books are shipped to Mexico City,
where the paper is recycled into packaging and roofing
insulation material. Using recycled paper for printing
new books also saves about two-and-a-half barrels of oil
per ton of phone books because less energy is needed to
make paper from recycled rather than virgin fibers. (City
&State 11-5-90)
November 28, 1990
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
LETTER SENT TO:
Miller's Sanitary Service, Inc.
Pride's Disposal
Schmidt's Sanitary Service, Inc.
Re: Rate Correction Notice
Dear
In followup to the direction given by the Utility & Franchise
Committee on November 20th, the following residential disposal
rates are to be corrected retroactively to July 1, 1990.
o On Call Service $4.75 (was listed as $6.90)
o Each Additional Can $10. 15 (was listed as $11. 15)
The Committee has left it up to each hauler who has been charging
a higher fee to determine how the customers are advised of this
change. Each customer affected by this change will either receive
a refund or credit to their account to remedy any overpayment based
on this revised rate.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Loreen R. Edin
Administrative Services Manager
lre/ms
c: Utility & Franchise Committee
13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171