HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 11-15 City Council Manager Workshop PacketAGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
MANAGER WORKSHOP
5:15 P.M. Monday, November 15, 2010
Council Chambers, City Hall
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
5:15 — 7:00 p.m.
1. Discuss Collection System Analysis Process
E. NEW BUSINESS
F. ADJOURNMENT
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLAND
MEMORANDUM
Agenda Item D.1
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager
Steve Kummer, Engineer
SUBJECT: Discuss Collection System Analysis Process
DATE: November 8, 2010 for the November 15 City Council Workshop
INTRODUCTION
On October 25, 2010, the city council called a special workshop for November 15. The purpose
of the workshop is to summarize the results of the October 4 Collection System Analysis special
city council meeting, to review options for proceeding with organized trash collection, and to
discuss a budget if the city moves forward with the analysis.
BACKGROUND
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Recommendation
In 2009 and 2010 the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission chose the
review of the city's open trash hauling system as one of their environmental goals. During this
review period, representatives of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) presented the
results of their 2009 organized collection study. The study was conducted to develop
quantifiable data comparing open and organized collection of trash and recycling as it relates to
economics, impacts on the environment, efficiency and effectiveness, and energy reductions. In
summary, the study found that the primary potential advantages of organized collection are
lower prices, reduced truck traffic, and community control over decisions related to waste
management. The primary advantage cited for open systems is the ability for people to choose
their own hauler. Based on this information and other research and review, the ENR
Commission recommended that city staff draft a report on organized trash collection which
includes information on the environmental and economic impacts.
City Council Review
In May 2010 the city council held a workshop to discuss the ENR Commission's
recommendation for review of the city's open trash hauling system. During the meeting the city
council authorized staff to form a work group consisting of three ENR Commissioners and city
staff. The work group was tasked with preparing a report on the pros and cons of the city's
open trash hauling system compared with an organized system, and with completing a work
plan for proceeding with the organized trash collection process.
In August 2010 the city council held a workshop to review the work group's report and work
plan. During the meeting the city council heard from Doug Carnival, attorney representing the
National Solid Waste Management Association. Mr. Carnival requested that the city should
meet with all interested trash haulers to discuss the issue prior to holding a public hearing to
adopt a resolution of intent to organize. The city council discussed such a meeting, and
ultimately directed staff to set a public hearing for October 4, 2010, to allow all interested parties
an opportunity to speak to the issue, not just the trash haulers. The meeting was intended to
Packet Page Number 3 of 19
gain a better understanding of problems and concerns the public had or would want answered if
the city council chose to continue to analyze the city's trash collection system.
Public Hearing Notification
To notify residents of the public hearing, city staff placed a public hearing notice in the
Maplewood Review, sent a notice to all city licensed trash haulers, posted the hearing on the
city's website, and published an article in the October Maplewood Review.
The National Solid Waste Management Association also sent notices to Maplewood residents
regarding the meeting. The notices stated that: "The City of Maplewood was considering the
elimination of the current waste hauling system where consumers select the waste hauler that
best meets their needs for service. Instead, the city is considering imposing a government
managed collection system where the city determines who hauls your waste, not you."
DISCUSSION
Special City Council Meeting Summary
During the October 4 Collection System Analysis special city council meeting, approximately
150 people attended the meeting, with 41 residents and 5 representatives of trash hauling
businesses speaking to the matter. The city council kept a list of the comments and separated
them into pros, cons, pet peeves, and a wish list. A summary of the people who spoke at the
meeting, the comments received, and the notes taken can be found on Attachment 1.
A majority of the comments received were from people voicing their concern about freedom of
choice and cost. Only a few spoke in favor of the idea. The challenge for the city council will be
deciphering the comments based on the fact that they were received with little background data
on which to base a decision, and may have been exaggerated by the National Solid Waste
Management Association's inciting notice warning residents of a government take over.
Collection System Analysis Options
For the city council's consideration, following are three options for moving forward with the
Collection System Analysis:
1. Public Hearing to Adopt a Resolution of Intent to Organize
Minnesota Statute, section 115A.94 (Organized Collection) sets forth the process a city
must follow in order to organize trash collection. In summary, the process could take at
least 180 days and includes a public hearing to adopt a resolution of intent to organize,
development of plans for organized collection, negotiations with all licensed trash
haulers who have expressed interest in participating, and finally documentation of the
city's decision. Upon completion of this process, if the city council still decides to move
forward with organized trash collection, the city must hold a hearing to detail the new
system, make findings for organizing, and ensure the system meets standards as
outlined in the statute.
The first option includes proceeding with a public hearing to pass a resolution of intent to
organize. This would be followed by the statutory process of planning, negotiations, and
findings. At a minimum this process would take 180 days. However, there is nothing in
the statute that dictates a maximum timeframe. The city could extend the 180 day
timeframe if needed.
2
Packet Page Number 4 of 19
2. Task Force
A second option to consider is forming a task force that would be charged with setting
goals and objectives for organizing, reviewing cost ranges for residents on current
hauling services in open and organized collection systems, and developing various
options for an organized collection system in Maplewood. The task force could include
up to eight people - two city council members, two ENR Commissioners, two trash
hauling representatives, and two at -large citizen appointees. The task force would have
a four to nine month time frame to complete their work, draft a report, and make
recommendations to the city council. Staff and possibly a consultant would support the
task force in their efforts. The city council would review the report and recommendations
prior to adopting the resolution of intent to organize.
3. Prioritized Goals and Objectives
According to the MPCA organized collection study, most cities who attempt to organize
trash collection begin by having city staff work with a city established committee to
review and research the various issues. The report states that through the committees,
the following main goals and objectives are identified for organizing:
• Reduce the amount of truck traffic, street repair and maintenance, number of
accidents, truck emissions, and noise.
• Reduce the cost per household per month due to improved efficiencies and
competitive bidding for the contract.
• Improve and standardize service levels.
• To better manage solid waste and recycling.
Since much of the initial review has been conducted by the ENR Commission and the
city council, the third option includes having the ENR Commission work with staff and
possibly a consultant to draft a statement that would set goals and prioritized objectives.
This process could take up to two ENR Commission meetings to draft the statement,
which would then be forwarded to the city council for formal adoption. The statement
would not specify any methods or tools in organizing, but act as a policy statement of
intended outcomes resulting from trash collection system improvements.
Once the goals and objectives are adopted and the city council decides to move forward
with organized collection, a public hearing would be set to adopt a resolution of intent to
organize. The goals and objectives will serve as key elements to success in the process
and will be used as findings in the resolution.
Collection System Analysis Budget
Staff is proposing that the city contract with an environmental consulting firm specializing in the
organized collection process. Depending on how the city moves forward with the process, the
consultant could be called on to assist in the creation of goals and objectives, ensure the city
meets the requirements of state statute, or could assist in the facilitation of the task force.
City staff is proposing a budget of approximately $60,000 for the initial phase of this work. This
funding will come from the city's 2011 Ramsey County SCORE grant. SCORE, which stands
for Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment, is designed to promote programs
which enhance or improve waste reduction and recycling efforts in the county. The city is
eligible for $77,638 in SCORE grant funding in 2011.
3
Packet Page Number 5 of 19
Additionally the city could obtain assistance with the Collection System Analysis through
Ramsey County's technical assistance contract. The city utilized this service for the creation of
our recycling request for proposal in 2010, and may be able to tap into some technical
assistance in 2011 if the county board deems organized collection a part of its mission of
improving waste reduction and recycling efforts.
City staff has submitted a request for qualifications from three environmental consulting firms for
this service. If the city council chooses to move forward with the Collection System Analysis,
staff will recommend one of the consulting firms and a budget at the next available city council
meeting for approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the October 4 Collection System Analysis special city council meeting comments and
notes and the options for moving forward with the analysis. Offer feedback and direction on the
next steps of the analysis.
Attachment: October 4 Collection System Analysis Special City Council Meeting Notes
4
Packet Page Number 6 of 19
Attachment 1
SPEAKERS
Special City Council Meeting
October 4, 2010
Collection System Analysis
1. Bob Parsons, 2229 Prosperity Road
a. "Wear and tear on the roads; we have business trash collection on Prosperity as well;
Prosperity is a brand new road and resident paid $5,800." Talked quite a bit about
vehicle damage to the roadway.
b. "No gross weight limit on residential streets"
C. "No gross weights on the cabs"
d. "Emissions from trucks as well"
e. "Use of Prosperity Road as a shortcut"
f. Free Enterprise is at stake if we go with one hauler; people should have freedom of
choice.
g. "Example of government taking over our lives"
h. "How about a referendum ?"
2. Bob Zick, Penn Place, North St. Paul
a. "Do you have a 9:30 curfew ?"
b. Compared to ObamaCare
C. "Dictating who they're buying the product from"
d. "Preserve freedom of choice for the haulers"
e. "Get the school busses off the street"
f. 42 U.S.C. 1982 — notice to cease and desist actions
3. Carole Lynne, 1723 Burke Avenue East
a. "I suffered financial hardship after the street was redone"
b. "Haulers starting and stopping and multiple haulers"
C. "Financially responsible of the City to have one hauler"
d. "1 would like to see one hauler in my area collecting trash"
4. George Rossbach, 1406 County Road C East
a. One truck on the road.
b. Saved considerable money switching to an independent and local hauler.
C. Pick up my X -mas trees for free.
d. Vacation stop.
e. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"
f. Contact Little Canada and Austin, TX
g. Periodic hauling of brush, appliances and bulky items
h. Come up with a plan that is superior and has a same or lower cost.
1
Packet Page Number 7 of 19
S. Mike Muenchow,1013 McClelland Street
a. Personal responsibility.
b. Individual choice
C. I am willing to pay extra cost to have my choice.
d. It's not the City's place to tell me who my haulers.
e. Damage to streets is a small issue.
f. Environmental issues a miniscule deal.
6. Greg Votel,1730 Atlantic Street
a. What is Maplewood going to "make" off of this.
b. The City of Maplewood is going to take more $$ and make a deal out of this.
C. Stay out of the citizen's business.
d. English /Frost project?
e. What if the hauler goes on strike.
f. Don't make choices for us.
7. Fran Grant, 1848 McKnight Road
a. Against Organized Hauling
b. Who's going to pay for the tipping charge.
C. Why do you want to take the small garbage man out of my neighborhood.
d. North St. Paul costs are significantly different.
e. Losing Jobs
8. Tom Connelly, 1193 County Road B East
a. I want the free enterprise system to prevail.
b. I want to hear more information on this.
9. Bill Schreiner, 1098 Beaver Creek Parkway
a. Trash is going into other people's dumpsters.
b. $8.30 for Beaver Creek Parkway residents.
C. Less trucks means less fuel.
10. Tom Gould, 1192 Lark Avenue
a. I don't want the government telling me what to do unless I can benefit by it.
11. Jim Imbertson, 585 Ferndale Street North
a. Against organized trash collection
b. I look at it as the government taking my personal freedoms and liberties away from me.
C. I don't believe a lot of the stuff about pavement damage due to the garbage trucks.
d. Competition is a good thing. Fear of putting all of the trash haulers out of business.
e. Used to have a compost pile in Maplewood — great way for people to dispose of brush,
leaves and grass.
Pi
Packet Page Number 8 of 19
12. Rod Johnson, 1935 Larpenteur Avenue East
a. The smaller, family -owner haulers have an advantage.
b. Rates go up, and up and up when his independent haulers was bought out by a multi-
national.
C. Big companies have an advantage.
d. Currently has Tennis.
13. Diana Longrie, 1771 Burr Street
a. Wants MPCA study from 2009.
b. The issue of axle weight needs discussion.
C. Senior citizens may need to consolidate trash because they don't produce a ton of trash.
d. Important to have competition for the consumer.
e. Hauler wants to maintain their business.
f. Fear of the City not being able to correct problems with trash hauling service.
g. Opt -out services
h. Snowbird option
i. Should be extended to all people within the City.
j. Reinstituting of seal- coating of the streets
k. Freeze thaw impacts.
I. Administrative fee can be 'ratcheted' up.
M. Compared it to the EUF rate.
14. Teresa Manzella, 1741 Atlantic Street
a. Not all that attached to my garbage hauler.
b. In favor of Organized Hauling.
C. Advantages in state purchasing and competitive bid pricing.
d. Problem with garbage bills over the last few years
e. Surcharges
f. Nothing controlling them from taking on the surcharges.
g. Recent switch to Tennis
h. Discount on dumpster fees if they have service with the hauler.
i. Smaller Bins
j. Has a 30 gallon bin because they recycle quite a bit.
k. Customer base remains a determining factor in the level of service provided.
I. Build customer satisfaction ratings into the contract specifications.
15. Jackie Henderson, 2109 Beam Avenue
a. Wants a choice.
b. Supposed to be a country of choice.
C. Want to be able to fire their hauler for bad service.
3
Packet Page Number 9 of 19
16. Ralph Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North
a. Opposed to organized hauling
b. Likes Tennis
C. Anytime the City gets their fingers involved in anything, there is an increase in fees.
d. Issue with the streets
e. Engineer these streets for the g- trucks.
f. Load limit signs on the streets.
17. William Hanson, 2836 Keller Parkway
a. Greetings from the "nanny" state.
b. Against this process
C. Believe in freedom of choice.
d. Trash hauler solicited him and saved him 30% on his hauling bill.
e. Thinks that the budget is more important than trash hauling.
f. Wishes he could sign a 3 -year contract with the City not to have taxes come up.\
18. Ann Cleland, 1309 Cope Avenue
a. Co- president of the league of women voters.
b. Support Organized trash collection by the municipality.
19. Ken Smart, 940 Bartelmy Lane
a.
Pros for Organized Trash collection
b.
Could make the same argument for other industries.
C.
Organized Grocery shopping.
d.
The Citizens just don't trust the City.
e.
Condescending attitude of the council on behalf of the citizens.
f.
Respect issue.
g.
Terms of cost
h.
If they were concerned about cost, then they would not have raised taxes.
i.
Pay fees for recycling
j.
Healthy "fund" balance in the recycling fund.
k.
Overcharged for recycling services over the past number of years.
I.
We're looking at not dropping the fund balance.
m.
No trust for service
n.
Doesn't think the City would be able to correct the problem.
o.
Against trash hauling.
20. Todd Swenson, 2717 Maplewood Lane East
a. Wear and tear on the roads.
b. Scientific study.
C. What percentage of truck traffic is going up residential roads from haulers? Need that
information.
1
Packet Page Number 10 of 19
d. More theory on wear and tear.
e. Thinks that freeze -thaw has more impact on the roads than the garbage trucks.
f. MPCA study: "If the City picks the hauler, then it's good"
g. Government tends to promote itself.
h. Doesn't trust the MPCA study.
i. Against Organized Hauling
j. Trash haulers are doing a fine job.
k. Likes to have the choice.
21. Tim Kinley, 2367 Larpenteur Avenue East
a. My right to contract with my own hauler.
b. The City has the responsibility to regulate commerce.
C. It's not the City's right to collect garbage to generate revenue.
22. Mark Allen, 345 Parkview Lane South
a. Opposed to this proposal
b. We're all adults and can choose our own service.
C. Terrible service from a hauler
d. Switched to Tennis
e. Encourage City to stop this process
23. Mark Bradley, 2104 Woodlynn Avenue
a. Ramsey already has 3 recycling centers in the area.
b. Biomass hauling to a compost center
C. Smaller trucks on the local roadways.
24. Jackie Turner, 1136 County Road D East
a. Opposed to organized trash hauling, for same previous reasons
b. Competition is good.
C. City may not listen to the customer base.
25. Mary Jane Schuller, 2648 Geranium Avenue East
a. Opposed to organized hauling.
b. If it goes through, want to be billed by the hauler.
C. Call your hauler if you have a problem with your rate.
d. Lived on street
e. Lasted for 45 years even after all the firetrucks and Yocum Oil trucks
26. Mitchell Imbertson, 500 Farrell Street North
a. Opposed to trash hauling.
b. No comparison to treating this as a public utility.
6 1
Packet Page Number 11 of 19
27. Al Benjamin, 2674 Elm Street
a. Needs more information
b. Not convinced with the pros and cons.
C. Ruining the roads
d. Doesn't know if this is true.
e. Thinks it's the delivery trucks
f. City government doing ok, but we don't need to make it any bigger.
g. If we implement a government policy, it's going to stay like that forever.
h. Need for compelling evidence and not just perceptions.
28. Joe Carbajal, Block of 1700 City Heights Drive
a. For private haulers
b. Against organized hauling
C. Looking for a good deal.
d. Road wear and tear.
e. Thinks that the plows are heavier than then garbage trucks.
f. Thinks the plow blades scraping the roads are the problem.
29. Jack Anderson, 2878 Meadow Lark Lane
a. Opposed to organized hauling.
b. Thinks that the City is biased toward the Pros.
C. Anytime the government says that the government can do it more efficiently than
anyone else, then I want to know what you're smoking.
d. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
e. I come here to find out what you're going to do to me, not what you're going to do for
me.
30. Timothy LaMusga, 1805 McKnight Road
a.
Lived all over the place.
b.
Assessed to reconstruct the streets.
C.
Against the restriction of choice.
d.
Thinks that everything is working great.
e.
They all have one garbage guy on their street.
f.
People look after their community on this street.
g.
Thinks we're doing this process for no reason.
h.
Fix the stuff that's broken.
31. Glenn Johnson, 1835 Phalen Place
a. No problems. Loves Tennis.
b. Publish rates in the Maplewood paper. May end up with one trash hauler without any
other intervention.
11
Packet Page Number 12 of 19
32. Dan Maher, 2534 Hillwood Drive East
a. Oak Park Heights — Organized Hauling
b. Increase in rates and decreasing service.
33. Gordy Fritsche, 411 Sterling Street South
a. Let free enterprise exist
b. The market will level everything out.
34. Mary Liljedahl, 1815 Radatz Avenue
a. Against Organized Hauling
b. Don't take my choice or my service.
35. Elizabeth Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North
a. Lots of people attend the hauler hearing, but not the tax levy increases for the year.
b. People don't seem to want organized hauling.
C. Freedom of speech and choice.
d. Strongly oppose organized trash hauling.
35. Bryan Olson, 1592 Roselawn Avenue, Falcon Heights
a.
Defeated this in Falcon heights 5 years ago.
b.
Defeated by 5:1 margin
C.
Defeated in Lauderdale.
d.
Roseville has looked at this, and nothing has changed.
e.
What's the problem? What's wrong with the way things are?
f.
I've talked to Civil Engineers, and they just chuckle.
g.
The worst thing for roads is mother nature.
37. Kate Borgheiinck, 1805 McKnight Road
a. Give us the right to vote (referendum)
38. Julie Knapp, 1879 Kennard Street
a. Crazy I have to be here.
b. Phone calls to other friends with organized haulers.
C. One 13 gallon bag of trash per week, they don't have a lot of trash.
d. Minimum of $20.00 month to pay for organized hauling.
39. Ruth Bremer, 25 Brentwood Curve
a. Opposed to organized trash collection.
b. A concern of trust.
C. Cumbersome process means that there is 150 people here to speak tonight. (seems
offended by this)
d. Prove me wrong.
7
Packet Page Number 13 of 19
40. Anne Fosburgh, Idaho Avenue East
a. Needs more information
b. Come to citizen's forum for the mayor (once per month)
41. Veronica Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North
a. Discussed issue at citizen's forum last Saturday.
b. They really like our trash hauler.
C. They like Tennis.
d. If the City has anything to do with it, they wouldn't go with it.
Hauler Comment
1. Doug Carnival (National Solid Waste Management Association)
a. A resolution of intent to organize.
b. Opposed to organized collection process. Government managed collection process.
C. The City will decide who collects all the haulers.
d. The City will break customer relationship between their haulers.
e. A solution in search of a problem.
f. This will cost the City money.
g. Hiring a consultant and attorney and costing money.
h. Current open hauling system permits individual choice.
i. City is going to decide for how long the contract will go.
j. City staff will receive the phone calls.
k. Haulers can compete door -to -door and house -to- house.
I. Competition is the American Way.
M. Road wear and tear issue (complex issue)
n. Streets are designed to take the load.
o. Trucks may be heavier.
p. No studies in any communities or proven in engineering studies.
q. Just conjecture.
r. A City Engineer in Arden Hills is on record as saying that environmental factors have
more problems.
S. Savings is miniscule.
t. 20 cities have looked at this as well as Ramsey /Washington counties.
U. Falcon Heights, Stillwater Twp, St. Anthony, etc. have abandoned this.
V. The citizens were overwhelmingly opposed to this.
2. Mark Stoltman (General Mgr of Randy's Environmental Services)
a. No input from the haulers.
b. Study from MPCA.
C. Be careful of study; thinks that they desperately want to have Organized Collection.
N .
Packet Page Number 14 of 19
d. Interesting study.
e. Study is 365 pages.
f. 4 days' notice before they could give comments for the study.
g. Doesn't think their input was taken seriously for the study and doesn't think that
Maplewood has properly taken their input.
h. Idea is to educate the citizens.
i. Thinks the process is good.
j. Thinks there are flaws in the report.
k. Consulting firms hired in St. Anthony and Arden Hills
3. Gene Wegleitner (Gene's Disposal)
a. Thinks Organized Collection is crap.
b. Thinks his small business is going to go by the wayside.
C. Going to lose the personal piece to it.
4. Jennifer Klennard (Public Sector Manager, Waste Management)
a. Waste Management wants to be part of the process.
b. Neutral position on organized collection.
C. Wants to work with the City.
5. Willie Tennis (Co- Owner, Tennis Sanitation, «C)
a. Concerns about job loss.
b. One hauler, not everyone will be happy because they can't provide every service.
C. Open market is best for the citizens.
0]
Packet Page Number 15 of 19
NOTES
Special City Council Meeting
October 4, 2010
Collection System Analysis
Pros
1. Efficiency
2. Decreased truck traffic.
3. Greater control to establish service requirements.
4. Competitively bid.
5. Generate revenues.
6. Less road impact.
7. Minimize dumping.
8. Less emissions.
9. Surcharge control.
10. Hold haulers accountable.
11. Reduced fees.
Cons
1. Households do not have choice.
2. Greater administrative involvement.
3. Small haulers have higher "entry" requirements.
4. Statutory process is cumbersome.
5. Free enterprise — loss of choice, loss of jobs.
6. Additional taxes.
7. Additional staff.
8. Drive haulers out of business.
9. Administrative fees.
Wish List
1. Posting weight limits on residential streets.
2. Referendum.
3. One hauler per area.
4. Temporary opt out clause for vacations, etc.
5. Free Christmas tree pick up.
6. Periodic hauling of brush, bulky items, appliances, etc.
7. An organized plan should be the same amount of money or less than existing.
8. Maintain personal responsibility and accountability.
LUS
Packet Page Number 16 of 19
Wish List (Cont.)
9. Want to keep jobs.
10. Want to know the options.
11. Get rates as low as a homeowner's association can negotiate.
12. Easy yard clean up disposal.
13. Find a way to allow small, local, family -owned haulers to be competitive.
14. Low volume options for seniors.
15. Maintain customer service - hauler needs to want to make individual consumer happy.
16. Opt out of trash even if you are not out of town.
17. Cost savings from competitive bid process.
18. Something to stop new fees from hauler (such as fuel surcharge).
19. Like discount on dumpster fees (roll off) for customers.
20. Lose contract if hauler does not meet customer service expectations.
21. 1 want to be able to fire my trash hauler.
22. Engineer our streets to higher weight specifications.
23. Wish to sign three -year contract with city to freeze budget
24. More time to talk at greater length.
25. Wish to see no recycling charge increase.
26. Different city council.
27. Scientific study of impact of trucks on street - info is on website.
28. Non - governmental sources of data to prove organized better and cheaper than open.
29. 1 want to do whatever I want with my garbage.
30. Want city to do more to regulate haulers and enforce law on them in current system.
31. Don't want city to do billing.
32. Wish to pay more, to feel free.
33. Wish for this discussion /consideration process to stop.
34. Biomass hauling.
35. Smaller trucks for local pick up, other trucks for long haul.
36. Want companies to listen to their customer base.
37. Wish to see no extra charges.
38. Wish to be billed by hauler, not city.
39. Wish not to have a monopoly.
40. Wish to keep size of city government from growing.
41. Wish to wait and not be locked into a government plan.
42. Put more factual information in newsletter (e.g., link to MPCA study and other data).
43. Like to get good deal.
44. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
45. Like having everyone on block choose same hauler.
46. Like small, quite garbage trucks.
47. Wish to not have to keep bugging hauler to keep low rate.
48. Publish rates in Maplewood paper.
11
Packet Page Number 17 of 19
Wish List (Cont.)
49. Wish for free enterprise to just take care of everything if you leave it alone.
50. Wish for referendum on issue.
51. Wish not to be here, doesn't want it discussed.
52. Wish to have trust, city council could regain by not pursuing this any further.
53. Don't make Scandinavian out of a German.
54. Wish everyone to voice opinion.
55. Want to keep Tennis.
56. Like hauler willing to pick up trash sloppily left by other haulers.
57. Wish National Association of Waste Haulers to be clear their mail is not from the city, because
mail from city is thrown away.
58. Wish not to have resolution on intent considered or passed.
59. Wish not to have city tell haulers how to operate business.
60. City staff, city council will get calls from unhappy customers.
62. Want to follow "the American way."
63. Wish not to see small family business haulers hurt if they fail to win a contract.
64. Don't want to see city divided into zones for competitive bidding.
65. Wish to keep their customers even if they can't offer lowest price.
66. Wish to dispute any studies that claim road wear from trash trucks.
67. Wish to give customers a chance to shop around.
68. People wish to have a choice, even if they could save a couple bucks a month.
69. Want city council to know that 900 Maplewood and 100 nonresident sent their postage -paid
cards in opposition.
70. NSWMA wished to have participated in discussions about topic @ ENRC.
71. NSWMA wished to have earlier input /influence on MPCA study and its criticism of open hauling.
72. Likes to maintain lengthy statutory process.
73. Wishes to question motivation of MPCA study and dispute it.
74. Wish to question sampling used in MPCA study, given its limitations (errors, small number of
responses, etc.)
75. Wish to emphasize weather /environment as bigger factor on roads than traffic.
76. Will they voluntarily provide better comprehensive cost price data?
77. Gene's Hauling - wish to emphasize personal service, provide owners personal cell number.
78. Gene's Hauling - I can't compete in a bid. The city will have the same problem with roads going
to low bidder.
79. Waste Management - Wish to say they do not oppose organized collection. Wish not to be pro
or con at this point.
80. Tennis - Wish to preserve jobs.
81. Tennis - Wish system where price alone is not everything.
82. Tennis - Wish to keep open system.
12
Packet Page Number 18 of 19
Pet Peeves
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Impacts of noise, etc., from business trash haulers near residential.
The city should have commercial truck restrictions on streets.
Gross weight of trucks, city should consider axel weight, not overall weight.
Government service charge.
What if the contractor the city chooses goes on strike?
How would the city handle a tip to the hauler?
Where will all of our trash be hauled in an organized system?
People without a hauler throw their garbage in other dumpsters or illegally dump elsewhere.
Don't want government telling me what to do.
Big company under ....?
Fuel surcharge fees.
Missed pickups.
What about other big trucks — FedEx, Ups, snow plow trucks.
Broken trash bins.
13
Packet Page Number 19 of 19