Thomas A. Tardif: City, then, has a duty to clearly mark its rights of way

To The Daily Sun,

The City Council’s Public Hearing Notices lack factual purpose, accounting for ZERO public comments. A NOTICE of October 15, 2020 re; “Public Hearing on October 26 2020” relative to proposed changes to chapter 194 - Refuse and Household Waste Collection.

The hearing opened at 7:10 pm, closed at 7:11 pm. Following the hearing, the city manager explained the background to these proposed changes to the Solid Waste ordinances was housekeeping. The habitude to waive a reading of Ordinances or Resolutions in their entirety and to read by title only summarily eliminates facts necessary for public comments. “Second” reading and approval of Ordinance passed. Ordinances 2020-194 – 4 or 12 are questionable as no public minutes were found of a first reading.

What was not said or published regarding 194-4, ORD-2020-194 Placement of Containers, Section; A, Containers set out for collection shall be placed as close to the street curb as possible without obstructing the roadway or sidewalk if one exists.

In addition, Section 194-11 Enforcement, D, “Violations will be subject to appropriate Penalties. “As noted in 194-12 below”. (Ord. 194-12 is not found within the 8 Pages document) which took effect on 26 October 2020.

However, 194-11, E, “illegal dumping” of trash, page 7, anyone found to be in violation by “illegally dumping” trash on public ways, shall be guilty of a violation penalty of $250.

The city manager offered the option to purchase a sticker in order to have third garbage can during curbside pickup.

On November 4, 2020 there was an apparent abuse of power by the director of Public Works, who initiated letters Re: Trash containers in the “City right of way” On October 30, 2020” to residences they had solid waste cans in the city right of way. Per section 194-12; “Any Person who violates any of the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a violation / penalty of $250.”

The average residential taxpayer has not been notified by the city or media as to the description of the city’s right of way. It’s the Public Work director's responsibility for marking each and every right of way of every street address. (no markings exist).

Older historical streets are 30 feet wide. Newer streets are 40 Feet in width and have sidewalks.

The issue of invading the “right of way” with trash containers or parking vehicles partially on the sidewalk has penalties. Accordingly, the distance from the right of way to the centerline varies with streets 30’ or 40’ wide. When vehicles or “trash containers” are forced to comply with conflicting ordinances is discriminatory; parking or household waste collection cans on 30’ wide streets result in one lane traffic which is problematic to say the least. The related ordinances are not a fit all. Any ordinance with a penalty should require paper copies, in its entirety, at first reading prior to a public hearing.

What is the precise “marked” point for placement for trash cans to avoid the $250 penalty?

Thomas A. Tardif

Laconia