06-26-72 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING JUNE 26, 1972 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING (CONTINUED) ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF $125,000.00 FROM THE CUMULATIVE SEWER BUILDING AND SINKING FUND. This being the time heretofore set for public hearing on the above ordinance, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. Mr. William Richardson, Director of Public Works, said that this project concerns the construction of a sanitary sewer on the north side of Cleveland Road, from Lilac Road to Maple Road, for the future expansion of the city. Mr. Roman Kowalski asked why the need to construct these sewers now, why not wait until they are needed. Mr. Richardson said that to wait to put the sewers in later would mean breaking up a $700,000 investment in new pavement. Miss Virginia Guthrie asked Mr. Richardson what the balance is in the cumulative sewer building and sinking fund. Mr. Richardson replied that the balance is $1,100,000.` However, $700,000 of that is allocated to a Model Cities project. Councilman Nemeth moved that the ordinance go to the Council as favorable, seconded by Councilman Szymkowiak. The motion carried. ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SUB - DIVISION (2) OF SUB- SECTION (A) OF SECTION 15 -16 OF CHAPTER 15 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF SOUr H BEND, INDIANA. This being the time heretofore set for public hearing on the above ordinance, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. Mr. John Montgomery, representing the Yellow Cab Company, spoke for the ordinance. The ordinance would provide for an increase in mileage rates to $.60 for the first one -fifth of a mile or fraction thereof and ten cents ($.10) for each additional one - fourth of a mile or fraction thereof. He called the attention of the Council to the fact that the 1971 Municipal Code lists the rate incorrectly at ten cents for each additional one -third of a mile but the 1968 ordinance does read ten cents for each additional one - fourth of a mile. Taxi cab rates are freed from price control so this rate change would not be in violation of the wage -price freeze. The rates being charged now are not sufficient to offer adequate compensation to the drivers and it is impossible to supply sufficient services at the present time. While the company has 75 licenses, there are only 35 operating at the present time. The proposed rates are in line with rates in cities of comparable size. Councilman Parent suggested that, if the Council is going to act as a regulating agency in matters of this kind, they will need to ask for more information on profit and loss factors. Councilman,Szymkowiak made a motion that the ordinance go to the Council as favorable, seconded by Councilman Kopczynsk The motion carried. ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REFUSE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REFUSE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA. This being the time heretofore set for public hearing on these ordinances, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. Councilman Miller proposed to amend the Ordinance contained in Item 3I on the agenda as follows: "Strike section 16 -8D. Strike Section 16 -30. Amend Section 16 -10B to read "The charge for city collection of garbage and trash and disposal shall be $1.50 per month for all households which can present to the Bureau of Refuse Removal a receipt for an exemption over 65 statement and $2.00 per month for all other households "; add a Section 16 -57, "Severability. If any portion of this ordinance be declared or adjudged invalid, the remaining sections shall remain in full force and effect so long as they do not conflict with existing law." Councilman Parent seconded the amendment. It was the feeling of the Council that the public hearing should be conducted before taking action on--the amendment. Mr. William J. Richardson, Director of Public Works, gave a presentation on both ordinances, referring to the Ordinance in Item 3H as the competitive collection proposal and Item 3I as the city collection. He said that the two ordinances are quite similar and briefly outlined the method of collection, routes, charges, and restrictions in both ordinances. Both ordinances provide for penalties and define what shall constitute public nuisances and both provide for licensing. There can be no estimate given on the cost of the competitive collection plan but Mr. Richardson did present a breakdown of proposed costs for the city collection plan which would require an operating budget of $857,000. A loan in the amount of $150,000 would be require in order to start the operation, and this loan would be repaid after the first collections had been made. Mr. Maurice Cohen, 725 E. Eckman, spoke against the ordinances. He said the cost would be much too high and the City now has a good Sanitation Department under Mr. Koloszar and he sees no need to change. Mr. George Herendeen, 1st Bank Building, Attorney for the Independent Trash Haulers Association, spoke against the ordinance. He said that he has the signatures of over 4,000 citizens who oppos the ordinances. He said that the officers of the Independent Trash Haulers Association are ask- ing the Council to delete both ordinances. These men are dependent upon their earnings as privat trash haulers. The ordinances would exclude from competition all private trash haulers and deprive them of their civil right to earn an independent living. The ordinances would cause irreparable and irrevefsible damage to the independent trash haulers. There are now 117 members of the Independent Trash Haulers Association. Mr. Herendeen suggested that the problems which exist could be solved by strict enforcement of existing laws. He said the proposed licensing fee in the ordinances is much too high as it would increase from the present $6.00 fee to $25.00. He referred to the ordinance proposing city trash removal as a capitalistic ordinance and the ordin- ance for combined city and private hauling as a marriage ordinance. He said they are opposed to both ordinances, but the marriage ordinance is less objectionable. He asked if the city is going to get into the landfill business. He asked that the two ordinances be defeated and that any other ordinance dealing with this problem not be presented without substantial modification. Mr. Kenneth Buhle, representative of the Teamsters Union, Local No. 364, spoke in opposition to the ordinances. He read a prepared statement expressing the opposition of the union. The state- ment recommended that the trash pickup program be left to the private trash haulers, that strict enforcement of existing ordinances would help solve the problems, and that the Council should consider setting up a Trash Committee to be of advisory assistance to the Council. Councilman Serge moved for a ten minute recess, seconded by Councilman Szymkowiak. Councilman Nemeth called for a show of hands on the vote. The motion carried with a vote of eight ayes, one nay (Council- man Nemeth). The meeting recessed at 10:15 p.m.