Removing the word tarp from the "tarp law" - UPDATED 4:28
With the leash law discussion under their belt, the commissioners are now dealing with the "tarp law."
County Health Director Denese Stallings said the "tarp law" is successful
"The program is working," said Stallings
She said the department did a survey six months ago and one recently.
"The last time we did it 50 percent of the vehicles were securing their loads, this time it's 71 percent."
She said since the law has been in place, 412 citations have been issued.
She's recommending the word "tarp" be taken out of the wording of the ordinance.
"We're not saying they have to have a whole tarp on it but they have to have something to hold it down," said Stallings. "People don't need to have a tarp for small amounts of garbage, they just need to have a way to secure it."
Stallings also recommended stiffer penalities, including $250 for first offense, $500 for the next.
County Commissioner Johnny Hutchins, who voted against the law from the beginning, said the survey conducted was just an attempt to fine people and isn't a proper way to find out if the "tarp law is working."
"That’s not a good way to determine if the people are cleaning up the county," said Hutchins.
Commissioner Jo Boggs said she would like to see stiffer penalties.
"I like your idea about increasing the fines," Boggs told Stallings.
Commissioner Eddie Holbrook agreed.
The commissioners are discussing removing "tarp" from the law but requiring people to securing with any means that does the job properly.
"You don’t have to completely cover the load as long as it’s secured," said Stallings.
Commissioners have scheduled a public hearing for the first meeting in September to change the fines to $250 for first offense, $500 for second, collect legal fees and change the wording of the ordinance.
County Health Director Denese Stallings said the "tarp law" is successful
"The program is working," said Stallings
She said the department did a survey six months ago and one recently.
"The last time we did it 50 percent of the vehicles were securing their loads, this time it's 71 percent."
She said since the law has been in place, 412 citations have been issued.
She's recommending the word "tarp" be taken out of the wording of the ordinance.
"We're not saying they have to have a whole tarp on it but they have to have something to hold it down," said Stallings. "People don't need to have a tarp for small amounts of garbage, they just need to have a way to secure it."
Stallings also recommended stiffer penalities, including $250 for first offense, $500 for the next.
County Commissioner Johnny Hutchins, who voted against the law from the beginning, said the survey conducted was just an attempt to fine people and isn't a proper way to find out if the "tarp law is working."
"That’s not a good way to determine if the people are cleaning up the county," said Hutchins.
Commissioner Jo Boggs said she would like to see stiffer penalties.
"I like your idea about increasing the fines," Boggs told Stallings.
Commissioner Eddie Holbrook agreed.
The commissioners are discussing removing "tarp" from the law but requiring people to securing with any means that does the job properly.
"You don’t have to completely cover the load as long as it’s secured," said Stallings.
Commissioners have scheduled a public hearing for the first meeting in September to change the fines to $250 for first offense, $500 for second, collect legal fees and change the wording of the ordinance.
posted by Pete DeLea at
2:49 PM
13 Comments:
I am beginning to tire of hearing about the surveys that indicate the Tarp Law is working. Tarp usage does not indicate less trash on the roads. Why does Ms. Stallings keep touting these surveys that are completely meaningless. Why do the commissioners besides Mr. Hutchins keep listening and buying into it. Increasing the fines for people who probably haven't even littered is insane.
Why do the Health Dept and Commissioners refuse listen to the people?
Oh, and removing the word Tarp from an ineffective law doesn't make it effective.
Pete,
Some corrections:
The proposed ordinance fines for not having garbage "enclosed, secured, or covered" are $25 for 1st; $50 for 2nd; and $100 for subsequent violations, not $250 and $500. The $250 and $500 fines are for LITTERING, not failure to enclose, secure, or cover.
Also, the stiffer fines that Jo Boggs and Eddie Holbrook liked were the proposed increased fines for littering. There is no proposed change for fines for failure to enclose, secure, or cover a load of solid waste. Those fine amounts remain the same as in the current ordinance.
Sam, thanks for clearing that up about the fines. I also thought they were for not having trash secured properly. I am all for stiffer penalities for littering.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sam,
I would be interested in another statistic. Maybe you can help. Ms. Stallings mentions that 412 citations have been issued for failure to cover a load being delivered to a convenience center.
How many citations have been issued to people actually littering?
I believe strongly that the litter problem in our county is from littering not failure to cover loads.
You will have to ask someone else for statistics.
Someone who allows trash to blow, fall, spill, or otherwise escape from a load that is inadequately secured or covered IS LITTERING.
If the 412 citations were issued for failure to cover a load properly, all of those (although YES, that would be considered littering!) are tarp-related. How many citations have been issued for those who have purposely tossed trash out of their vehicles? Are those stats listed anywhere?
When roads are adopted, does this not help, and if so, why isn't the practice being promoted?
I am assuming, Sam, that you are Mr. Lockridge, Solid Waste Director.
We can argue semantics forever. It is not getting us anywhere.
It seems to me if you and Ms. Stallings want to prove your program is working, you would want to provide as much supporting data as possible. You statistical proof is biased and limited. You are reporting Tarp usage and citations issued of people that show up at the convenience centers. Yeah, they violated your covered load ordinance, but that may not have actually littered.
Why won't you provide us, the citizens of Cleveland County, with statistics of how many citations have been issued to people who purposefully toss trash out?
Why won't you provide us with statistics of how many citations have been issued to people who have actually littered becasue they didn't properly cover their load?
Why won't you provide us with statistics of how many citations have been issued to people who didn't properly cover their load while they were travelling to places other than the convenience centers?
Do you have any of these statsistics? If not, why not? These are important questions that can help determine the true effectiveness of the campaign against litter.
In many places around Shelby, which last time I checked, is in Cleveland County, there is quite a bit of trash blowing around the parking lots uptown, in retail locations and fast food joints.
That trash gets there primarily from 3 sources.
1. People tossing it out there.
2. While transferring from building to dumpster.
3. while transferring from dumpster to collection truck.
Toss out number 1 because that seems to be low on the Health Dept and Commissioner's list of litter sources.
The other two are examples of improperly covering the trash during transfer and transportation. Have there been any citations for this?
Real simple here, check the lots with trash blowing around, fine the company responsible for the dumpster and the company picking up the trash because they failed to properly cover the trash and they actually littered unlike most of the people who are being cited.
Mr. Schaeffer:
You assume incorrectly as to my identity.
Also, while the City of Shelby is within Cleveland County, Shelby is an incorporated area with its own code of ordinances. The Cleveland County Code does not apply within incorporated areas of the county unless requested by the towns or cities through interlocal agreements. The situations you describe in the City of Shelby are unfortunate, but are not controlled by the County Code.
So does this mean that issues involving "litter" inside the city limits, are all under the "jurisdiction" of Lisa?
I do know that many area businesses have hired private companies to keep their lots clean, but If someone is driving through the city limits and tosses out trash onto the street, who is responsible for issuing a citation to the person, or is this even being done?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home