Laserfiche WebLink
_ ,,;, <br />fo: ~ -.~.~.c.'~!~7~.C,c.. Date <br />F ~' - <br />iubj ect: <br />specified containers can be subjected to the penalty provision under <br />the SAMC. <br />It appears therefore .that in the mean time the only effective <br />enforcement tool available to the Department of Public Works to <br />enforce the Council Resolution is to refuse to collect refuse from <br />those owners who have failed to use the specified type of container <br />after receiving notification thereof. <br />We have considered the section 16-32(a) giving the Director <br />of Public Works the authority to make regulations concerning the <br />type and location of waste containers. However, unfortunately, <br />this section does not provide that a failure to comply with any of <br />the regulations of the Director of Public Works in such regard <br />would constitute a misdemeanor under the SAMC. It is essential <br />that such wording be included so that the regulations of the Director <br />of Public Works. can be enforced by criminal prosecution. <br />We have considered the enforcement of the Council Resolution <br />under 16-1 SAMC which states: <br />"No person shall place...any...trash...upon...private <br />property...within the city, or cause the same to be done except in <br />such places and in the manner prescribed by the Council." <br />This provision could possibly be interpreted to be the prohibition <br />section prohibiting persons from depositing trash except in those <br />types of containers specified by the Council in its resolution. <br />However, it is this offices opinion that the words "in the manner <br />prescribed by the Council." would refer to such manner as prescribed <br />by the Council by ordinance and not by resolution. Section 16-6 <br />makes the violation of Section 16-1 a misdemeanor and in addition. <br />tY~ereto a public nuisance which may be abated as provided in <br />section 18-1. This still doesn't help us in determining whether <br />tY;e acts .prohibited must be specified by ordinance or by resolution, <br />and therefore our original opinion that the Council must specify <br />them by ordinance still stands. <br />We have considered section 16-32(d)(1) which states: <br />"Any container that does not conform to the provisions of <br />this Article or that may have irregular sharp edges or any other <br />defect liable to hamper or injure the person collecting the contents <br />thereof shall be properly replaced upon notice." <br />This no doubt is a prohibitive type section, however, it does refer <br />to "provisions of the Article" which would imply provisions which <br />~'"' would prescribe a specified type of container in ordinance form <br />rather than resolution form. <br />19 <br />