|
minutes 12-04-99Page 22 of 39
<br />deal with it, but the Commission wouldn’t have anything to do with bringing that forward. That has to be a Legislative -
<br />HERKES: I’m sorry that’s being brought up because it’s going into the minutes and it will confuse the discussion.
<br />SANTANGELO: Then, in regard to that, I’d like to say one thing then. It’s an error, I feel, Marni, when it comes to pay-as-
<br />you-throw. No renter, and that’s a generalization, sees themselves as paying for solid waste, and there’s no incentive
<br />whatsoever, built into any of this, and this is where a Commission could, at least, bring recommendations that create
<br />environmental stewardship in terms of our solid waste stream. And so, there are people out there, clumsy as they are, they’re
<br />trying to address that part of it, but if you’re not a property owner, and you may pay for it in your rent -
<br />HERKES: That’s right. I’m glad you recognize that.
<br />SANTANGELO: But you don’t see it that way, and the intelligence of a lot of people out there, and their awareness of the
<br />solid waste stream, aren’t near what you are, as an individual. And matter of fact, you are unique. And even here with us,
<br />dealing with this, we’re unique in the knowledge that we deal with here, and a lot of people, with this single member change.
<br />I mean, we see the wisdom in it, but the perception in the public - Anyway, so this was brought forward as what I thought
<br />was a pretty good idea and I felt this Commission could deal with it well.
<br />RAY: Roland.
<br />HIGASHI: Let me just follow up with some of the questions that I have. Is this Commission envisioned to be like a Liquor
<br />Commission? Does it have staff? Does it have an Executive Director? How big is it? Is it strictly voluntary? How do you
<br />envision this thing to be operational?
<br />SANTANGELO: And that’s why I was a little reluctant to bring it up at this point, because that’s what needs to be answered.
<br />The models that I would look at, real quick, and I have that in process right now, would be the Planning Commission, the
<br />Water Commission and the Liquor Commission, and see what they are, and try to focus more on what this body thought
<br />would be the focus of this Commission, and see what parts it would bring in.
<br />RAY: So, I think the answer to that is yes, it would be a fully staffed Commission.
<br />HIGASHI: So, maybe we’re talking about an Office of Environment, or maybe we can expand it, rather than narrowing the
<br />scope such as that, and I think some of us are looking at something along that line.
<br />IRVINE: I guess that was my question is how can we ignore water if we’re doing wastewater and solid waste?
<br />SANTANGELO: One’s a consumable and one’s a waste. To me, I keep getting confused how they’re even -
<br />IRVINE: Yes, but our drinking water becomes wastewater, as we -
<br />HIGASHI: Do I still have the floor?
<br />RAY: Yes, let Roland finish. Sorry.
<br />HIGASHI: So, my idea is if we’re going to be staffing, then we should look at the more global picture, the bigger picture, of
<br />integrating all of our waste, all of our consumables, and I think many of us are thinking about some kind of Office of
<br />Environment, and be more encompassing. So, I’m not against the idea, but I think maybe we should carry it one step further.
<br />IRVINE: What about a subcommittee?
<br />YOSHIYAMA: Do we have time for all of this?
<br />HIGASHI: I’m done. I like the idea, though.
<br />IRVINE: I’m vague, yet.
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 12-04-99.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|