Laserfiche WebLink
MLNUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOV:Q~tBER 29, 1994 <br />following the practices of other cities, as well as <br />trying to meet people~s expectations to get streets <br />down to bare pavement. <br />Morelan suggested that the City monitor the need for <br />additional street sweeping throughout the summer, and <br />if the need and dollars are there, a second sweeping <br />should be done. <br />Scalze agreed a second sweeping should be looked at. <br />Morelan asked about the feasibility of a second clean- <br />up day. <br />The Public Works Superintendent reported that BFI does <br />not make money on the clean-up day it conducts in the <br />City, but has it in order to assist property owners in <br />cleaning up their properties. BFI would hold a second <br />clean-up day, but would expect reimbursement of <br />expenses from the City, which the Superintendent <br />estimated could be much more expensive. <br />It was noted that at one time the City held both a <br />spring and fall clean-up day, and participation was <br />about three times as high in the spring. <br />Morelan suggested a second sprinq clean-up day. <br />The Superintendent replied that BFI is heavily booked <br />during the spring, and thought it would be difficult to <br />schedule the second clean-up day not withstanding the <br />cost to the City. <br />Morelan suggested a reciprocating agreement with an <br />adjacent city whereby Little Canada residents could <br />participate in their clean-up days. <br />The Superintendent pointed out that Little Canada <br />allows non-Little Canada residents to participate since <br />the cost is passed on to the customer. <br />Hanson suggested that Public Works determine if <br />adjacent cities would allow Little Canada residents to <br />participate in their clean-up days. If so, the dates <br />of the various clean-up days could be published in the <br />Little Canada newsletter. <br />Morelan asked about the decrease in day camp subsidy <br />5 <br />