Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council gives first passage to solid‑waste ordinance tweak after debate over condominiums

2504246 · March 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council gave first passage and amended proposed changes to the city’s solid waste ordinance to preserve the term “condominiums” and add the qualifier “business condominiums” to the commercial definition; amendment and main motion passed by unanimous 7‑0 votes and the public hearing was continued.

The City Council on March 4 held a public hearing and gave first passage to proposed amendments to Chapter 62 (Solid Waste) that would clarify curbside collection eligibility for condominiums along city rights of way.

Councillor Chittum moved an amendment to keep the word "condominiums" in the ordinance text and insert the qualifier "business" before it to make clear that non‑residential, business condominiums remain within the commercial activity definition; Councillor Nejean seconded the amendment. Staff said the change matches prior public discussions and clarifies public requests. After public comment and council discussion about inconsistencies between the city code and internal policy documents, the amendment passed 7‑0.

The main motion to grant first passage to the ordinance change — with the amendment incorporated — also passed by a roll‑call vote of 7‑0. Staff and members of the public urged a larger review to reconcile the 18‑page ordinance and the two‑page policy guidance so eligibility and fees align. Staff said the fee change itself would return for later council action and the public hearing was continued to the council’s next regular meeting.

Why it matters: councilors and residents noted the ordinance and operating policy contain inconsistencies that affect who receives curbside service and who pays fees. Public commenters urged the city to convene a task force or working group to reconcile ordinance language, policy, eligibility and fee structure.