My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/13/1987
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1987
>
10/13/1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:59:20 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:01:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/13/1987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ST 1 tj <br />Book <br />69 FA VE 666 <br />Chairman Scurlock believed <br />our consultant, Camp, <br />Dresser <br />McKee, has been working diligently on their per parcel analysis <br />which is almost complete. He concurred with staff's recommenda- <br />tion in terms of the commercial, but he felt, rather than require <br />the applicants to perform a needs study, it would be more <br />appropriate for us to direct Camp, Dresser & McKee, who is <br />already heavily involved in that process, to give us.a recommen- <br />dation re what we should do. The Chairman did feel the system we <br />presently have is antiquated and that possibly we should look <br />into districting the county as he did not want to have 5 or 6 <br />trucks going up and down the same street. <br />Commissioner Eggert did not understand why it is necessary <br />to have a needs study for residential but not for commercial <br />since it seems the county should know what the needs are in both <br />categories. <br />Director Pinto advised that our two existing franchises are <br />non-exclusive; although they do have a clause that the county <br />will not issue another franchise unless there is a specific need <br />shown in a study, and this takes a lot of the non -exclusiveness <br />out of the franchises. The reason for franchising is to protect <br />the interests of the people when there is a monopolized type of <br />business, which this is. In this case, however, commercial is <br />unregulated, which is quite customary in this type business, the <br />reason being there is usually a negotiated fee that takes place <br />between the commercial establishment and the collector relating <br />to the level of service they desire,-i.e., they may want pickup <br />more frequently, may want a.larger container, etc. There are a <br />lot of variables, and there is a lot of competition. As to <br />districting, Director Pinto noted that because of zoning, you <br />- - might end up giving the "plum" to one district while another <br />might be strictly residential and not have the ability to <br />participate in the money maker, which is commercial. <br />Director Pinto emphasized that residential needs protection, <br />and it is. much more convenient to regulate. What we have to deal <br />24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.