MANDATORY CONTAINER SERVICE; COUNCIL RESOLUTION 72-7

Home Browse Search

n ~`yW~~ ~~~~ t~~~u ('' ~ ;~:. ate,,' ~ ~~;,;~'/;,~,. f o: Date F. subject: We have also considered section 16-32(e)(1) which states: "No person shall place any refuse...upon any private property in the city, whether owned by such person or not, except... in proper containers for collection without express approval granted by the Director of Public Works." This section simply prohibits the depositing of trash in other than "proper containers" but does not define what a "proper container" consists of nor does it tell us where to find such a definition or who has the authority to so define. Legally we suppose the Director could specify what constitutes a proper container in his regulations, but as we understand none have been adopted in writing. The Director could of course in writing adopt the council Resolution as his regulation, but we would again lack an effective penalty provision. We have also considered section 16-32(e)(2) which states: "Any unauthorized accumulation of refuse on any premises is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is prohibited." This section might impliedly give the City ~~ttorney's Office the right to prosecute the use of containers nog: authorized by the Director of Public Works as a public nuisance but it again lacks the force and effectiveness needed to mak~lconsistently successful prosecution,. After thoroughly studying the various code sections contained in the refuse collection regulations it is our opinion that after a close analysis none of them gives us a completely adequate means to prosecute for failure to use the specified containers. We therefore strongly suggest that if the mandatory requirements as specified in Council Resolution 72-7 are those that the Director of Public Works wishes to have imposed then the resolution should be put in ordinance form and enact•.it as such. If such an ordinance is enacted there will be no need for the required notices specified for the resolutions. However, we would nevertheless request that you give at least two notices to the parties involved with followup inspections after each by either regular mail or certified mail at your discretion. We have found no provision under the refuse collection regulations prohibiting adjacent owners from using the containers on neighboring premises although, in our opinion, we feel that such a provision should be adopted by the city to stop this practice. The neighboring owners are consenting to the use of their containers by their neighbors, and if the Director has proof that such practice is being carried on, the director can refuse to collect the refuse of the neighbors allowing such use. If the neighboring owners are 20