Laserfiche WebLink
July 14th, 2026 St. Anthony Council Work Session - 3 <br />Councilmember Doolan stated that a list of resources would be mutually beneficial. She <br />highlighted that there will be natural incentives for construction companies to partner with these <br />reuse organizations as landfills become more overburdened and waste removal becomes more <br />expensive. <br />City Manager Yunker provided personal testimony that, when attempting to clear out a relative’s <br />estate, he found that recycling old items and building materials is not always as easy as it may <br />seem. He noted that many businesses are at capacity and many items cannot be reused. He <br />stated that the current language is very flexible and that making it more prescriptive could be <br />dangerous, and that the ordinance can always be adjusted in the future. <br />Councilmember Randle noted that he disliked the proposal to provide City funding to incentivize <br />contractors and that any discussion of grants makes him nervous, as he is unsure where the <br />funding comes from. He asked if the grants noted by Sustainability Coordinator Saulog were <br />guaranteed. Assistant City Manager Morello stated that they are not guaranteed to be provided <br />through third parties. <br />Mayor Webster clarified that the only currently accepted change was modifying the language <br />from “more than four” to “five or more” regarding how many units constitute a multi-family <br />residential building. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy asked whether they would like to specify a remediation process if an <br />individual fails to meet the compliance and monitoring requirements or leave it to the Code <br />Education Officer. City Planner Grittman noted that the latter would be the current expectation. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy noted that this could raise issues in the future if it is not further <br />specified. <br />Councilmember Doolan recommended adding specificity to inform residents that the standards <br />will be upheld and tested fairly. <br />City Planner Grittman directed the Council to Section F, which discusses enforcement directly. <br />Councilmember Jenson expressed that he prefers to leave the language as is and that they can <br />update the ordinance if problems arise. He noted that there are already large expenses <br />associated with the ordinance, and adding more items that may scare off developers is not in <br />their best interest. Councilmember Randle voiced his support for this proposal. <br />Mayor Webster noted that compliance will be assessed at the time of approval and 1 and 2 <br />years after the permit is approved. She asked what the rationale was for the second-anniversary <br />compliance check-in. City Planner Grittman stated that this was proposed to encourage ongoing <br />compliance updates from the builders, ensuring they are not temporarily upholding standards <br />only to abandon them later. <br />Assistant City Manager Morello informed the Council that Staff had also proposed a five-year <br />check-in, but due to Staff capacity concerns, they decided not to include it. <br />Councilmember Jenson asked who would conduct the compliance monitoring. City Planner <br />Grittman stated that the building owner will be required to provide a report and that Staff will <br />evaluate it. He expressed the belief that the reporting would not be extensive or deeply <br />burdensome. <br />4